UFS2 limits

[Erik Trulsson]

On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 12:48:51PM -0500, Dan wrote:
> Erik Trulsson(ertr1013 at student.uu.se)@2008.11.09 17:53:14 +0100:
> > Personally I cannot think of any situation where one would actually want
> > (let alone need) as many as 30000 or more subdirectories in a single
> > directory.
> 
> I've seen some Java apps that use the FS as the DB. Nothing wrong with
> that. I think an FS can be quite a good DB, if implemented well. This gives
> many data manipulation options with traditional FS tools, shell
> scripts, etc.

Lets just say that there are reasons why the major database systems
generally use their own methods to store and organize the data rather
than rely on the file system for that.

Besides, for most database applications I can think of, what you would
need are lots of *files*, which do not have any special limitations other
than the the total space and number of i-nodes on the filesystem.
Even if you were using the FS as a DB I can't think of any good reason
to need 30000+ subdirectories in a single directory.

> 
> Large Maildirs for postfix and qmail/Courier. Some people don't delete
> email at all.

Again, that requires lots of files, not lots of subdirectories.



-- 
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr1013 at student.uu.se