<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Ok, I try to summarize what I gathered from this and the earlier thread to help other "htree newbies" (Please correct my statements if necessary): - To use htree enabled ext - Filesystems in 2.4 kernels, you need a) a htree enabled kernel; patch against 2.4.21 can be found at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://thunk.org/tytso/linux/extfs-2.4-update/">http://thunk.org/tytso/linux/extfs-2.4-update/</a> Curiously enough, I colud not apply this patch against a clean 2.4.27 tree - is there anything special to be aware of ?? b) the current e2fsprogs which you can get from <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/">http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/</a> c) you have to enable dir_index on the filesystem with <> # umount /dev/xyz # tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/xyz</> # e2fsck -fD /dev/xyz # mount /dev/xyz d) The performance of the htree indexed filesystem depends on the usage by the userspace programs; if they open all files in a directory after gaining directory information with readdir() the performance is worse than with a vanilla ext3 fs, at least if we have many files in that directory [as it is the case with maildir structures]. This can be cured by an additional userspace library which can be found in the message <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext3-users/2004-September/msg00025.html">https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext3-users/2004-September/msg00025.html</a> e) One question remains open : Is the htree feature in its current state considered stable enough to be used in production systems ? I read some reports on filesystem corruption, but most of these applied to older versions of htree. Are there differences between the 2.6 implementation and the 2.4 backport ? Thank you for comments, Jakob Curdes </body> </html>