[ANNOUNCEMENT] [1.7] Updated: coreutils-7.0-1
Wed Dec 17 03:13:00 GMT 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
According to Christian Franke on 12/16/2008 1:18 PM:
> On my XP SP2, st_size is always 0, even for large and fragmented
Likewise for all the machines I have access to. Maybe it is just Vista
that added directory size tracking?
>> Interesting question. NTFS and FAT filesystems are name-sorted by
>> default. AFAIK directory changes on FAT are done in-memory, resorted,
>> and then written back as a whole block to disk.
> XP does not sort a FAT directory.
Most readdir() implementations return files either in creation order or
name order. But what matters for the optimization done by coreutils is
inode order - on file systems where increasing inodes represent increasing
disk positions, then stat'ing files in inode order results in less seek
time than visiting files in name order. I guess what needs to happen now
is actually testing whether NTFS is like ext3 in benefiting from the inode
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!
Eric Blake email@example.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin