Re: LFS thoughts

[Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>]

> On Aug 22, 2025, at 9:09 PM, Konrad Schroder <perseant%hhhh.org@localhost> wrote:
> 
> (If we didn't care at all about compatibility, we could improve things further by putting the entire inode into the ifile rather than just a pointer to the inode block, as suggested long ago by joff@.  This would make the ifile quite a bit larger and less likely to fit in the buffer cache, but would keep empty inode blocks from contributing to the cleaning inefficiency problem.  It would also make file reads slower in many cases since the inodes would not be physically close to where the file data blocks are.  If the disk has no seek penalty, of course, this might not be a problem at all.)

My hot take is that NetBSD embarking on a project to make an SSD-optimized LFS file system production-ready would be super cool.

-- thorpej