Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: why is the size of a directory always 1024b ? | Date | Thu, 24 Jun 1999 17:42:38 -0400 | From | "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <> |
| |
In message <Pine.LNX.4.04.9906241421090.10023-100000@blrmail.tatainfotech.com>, MURALI N writes: +----- | drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 May 4 21:35 lost+found | drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 1024 May 5 12:12 mnt | dr-xr-xr-x 33 root root 0 Jun 23 19:06 proc | | "lost+found" | | drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 May 4 21:35 . | drwxr-xr-x 17 root root 1024 May 28 16:40 .. | | If the present scheme allocates 13 * 1024 bytes for just "." and "..", I | feel it is time to rethink the directory handling. +--->8
lost+found is a special case: fsck is much more reliable at recovering files when lost+found has empty directory entries preallocated (otherwise it has to allocate a block from a known-corrupt filesystem, which can lead to disaster); so when lost+found is created, a bunch of files are created in it and then removed to preallocate entries in it.
-- brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering KF8NH We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |