Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-21 Thread Daniel Phillips
Hi Dave, Thank you for your insightful post. The answer to the riddle is that the PHTree scheme as described in the link you cited has already become "last gen" and that, after roughly ten years of searching, I am cautiously optimistic that I have discovered a satisfactory next gen indexing scheme

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-21 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:49:49PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Rob Landley wrote: > > I'm confused, http://tux3.org/ lists a bunch of dates from 5 years ago, then > > nothing. Is this project dead or not? > > Not. We haven't done much about updating tux3.org

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-20 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Rob Landley wrote: > I'm confused, http://tux3.org/ lists a bunch of dates from 5 years ago, then > nothing. Is this project dead or not? Not. We haven't done much about updating tux3.org lately, however you will find plenty of activity here: https://github

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-20 Thread Rob Landley
On 03/19/2013 06:00:32 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013 schrieb Daniel Phillips: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wro

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-20 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Am Mittwoch, 20. März 2013 schrieb David Lang: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2013, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013 schrieb Daniel Phillips: > >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Mon,

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-19 Thread David Lang
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013, Martin Steigerwald wrote: Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013 schrieb Daniel Phillips: On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wrote: The situati

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-19 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:04 PM, David Lang wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2013, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > >> Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013 schrieb Daniel Phillips: >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-03-19 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013 schrieb Daniel Phillips: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wrote: > >> > The situation I'm thinking of is when dealing w

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-28 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wrote: >> > The situation I'm thinking of is when dealing with VMs, you make a >> > filesystem image once and clone it mu

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-28 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > > >On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:13:37PM -0800, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > >>>The thing that jumps out at me with this is

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-28 Thread Darrick J. Wong
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > >On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:13:37PM -0800, Daniel Phillips wrote: > >>>The thing that jumps out at me with this is the question of how you will > >>>avoid the 'filesystem image in a file' di

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-28 Thread David Lang
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Theodore Ts'o wrote: On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:13:37PM -0800, Daniel Phillips wrote: The thing that jumps out at me with this is the question of how you will avoid the 'filesystem image in a file' disaster that reiserfs had (where it's fsck could mix up metadata chunks fro

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-28 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:13:37PM -0800, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > The thing that jumps out at me with this is the question of how you will > > avoid the 'filesystem image in a file' disaster that reiserfs had (where > > it's fsck could mix up metadata chunks from the main filesystem with > > met

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-27 Thread David Lang
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013, Daniel Phillips wrote: Compared to Ext2/3/4, Tux3 has a big disadvantage in terms of fsck: it does not confine inode table blocks to fixed regions of the volume. Tux3 may store any metadata block anywhere, and tends to stir things around to new locations during normal operat

Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

2013-01-27 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:02 PM, David Lang wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jan 2013, Daniel Phillips wrote: > The thing that jumps out at me with this is the question of how you will > avoid the 'filesystem image in a file' disaster that reiserfs had (where > it's fsck could mix up metadata chunks from the