mirrors/git-annex
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages 1 Wiki Activity Actions

Added a comment

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
http://joey.kitenet.net/ 2011-03-14 16:12:51 +00:00 committed by admin
parent 769d2a780d
commit 5e9f902403
1 changed files with 12 additions and 0 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

12
doc/forum/hashing_objects_directories/comment_2_d095c769febedca2d69fa5d099bcb520._comment Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
[[!comment format=mdwn
username="http://joey.kitenet.net/"
nickname="joey"
subject="comment 2"
date="2011-03-14T16:12:51Z"
content="""
My experience is that modern filesystems are not going to have many issues with tens to hundreds of thousands of items in the directory. However, if a transition does happen for FAT support I will consider adding hashing. Although getting a good balanced hash in general without, say, checksumming the filename and taking part of the checksum, is difficult.
I prefer to keep all the metadata in the filename, as this eases recovery if the files end up in lost+found. So while \"SHA/\" is a nice workaround for the FAT colon problem, I'll be doing something else. (What I'm not sure yet.)
There is no point in creating unused hash directories on initialization. If anything, with a bad filesystem that just guarantees worst performance from the beginning..
"""]]