JP Vossen on 2 Sep 2009 18:11:05 -0700

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] File System Directory Limits

> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 16:17:37 -0400
> From: Tim Allen <>
> We're trying to replicate what the SEC does (don't ask).
> Unfortunately, this somehow involved creating upwards of 100,000
> subdirectories in a root directory.

Which "SEC?"

I kind of doubt they are doing this on ZFS, so...  How *are they* doing 
it.  If you know what they are doing do you know someone you can ask? 
What "root" dir on what file system on what OS on what hardware, 
starting when?

I'd be interested to know the answer just to see what setup allowed them 
to be that boneheaded long enough ago that everyone didn't immediately 
realize what a bad idea it was.

> UFS limits us at 32k, NetApp at 64k. If we were designing this, yes,
> we'd want to come up with a better scheme or hash things out, but it
> really is essential we replicate their set up for the closest
> simulation.
> Does anyone know of a file system that can handle upwards of 100,000
> sub-directories in root?

Shot in the dark?  Can you do the 100K in a sub-dir and chroot into 
that?  (This may be a wildly wrong-headed idea, I've never looked into 
those kinds of limits.)

Good luck, and let us know how it turns out,
JP Vossen, CISSP            |:::======|
My Account, My Opinions     |=========|
"Microsoft Tax" = the additional hardware & yearly fees for the add-on
software required to protect Windows from its own poorly designed and
implemented self, while the overhead incidentally flattens Moore's Law.
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
Announcements -
General Discussion  --