Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!ece-csc!mcnc!xanth!nic.MR.NET!tank!uwvax!rutgers!att!whuts!homxb!homxc!dwc
From: dwc@homxc.UUCP (Malaclypse the Elder)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: System V file systems
Message-ID: <4079@homxc.UUCP>
Date: 4 Nov 88 19:50:00 GMT
References: <6413@daver.UUCP> <8332@alice.UUCP> <1988Oct27.173247.2789@utzoo.uucp> <917@vsi.COM>
Organization: Legion of Dynamic Discord
Lines: 17

In article <917@vsi.COM>, friedl@vsi.COM (Stephen J. Friedl) writes:
> 
> How hard is it for an instantiation of UNIX to support multiple
> kinds of blocksizes?  I would think that keeping the blocksize in
> the superblock would make it pretty easy, so I could use 1k blocks
> for root, and (say) 8k for the /database partition with a dozen
> files all > 1MB.  Currently it seems like a big deal for them
> to come out with a new supported blocksize.
> 
the difficulty that i see is in the maintenance of the
buffer cache.  do you have separate buffer caches for
each size or somehow share them.  then there is the modification
of file system maintenance programs (have you looked at fsck
source lately).  not such a big deal but a consideration.

danny chen
att!homxc!dwc