SUMMARY: Question on 'ln'

Date: Wed Mar 22 2000 - 15:59:01 CST

Many thanks to all those that responded! It's gratifying to know there's still
more I can learn.

There were two threads of thought for the 'ln' command:

1 - Using symbolic links (ln -s) allowed for the capability to determine the
original file that was linked to.
2 - Using hard links reduces the I/O overhead when accessing the file. Of the
responsed I received in this thread, the following from John Wright summarizes:

   A soft link is slower....
   A hard link is simply another directory entry for the same inode.
   In other words a simple 'open' on the hard link is a one step process.
   An 'open' on a symlink is actually:
   * open symlink
   * read file to get real name
   * close symlink
   * open real file
   In itself this is not a big overhead but when you open/close the file
   thousands of times (e.g. via Oracle) the impact is significant.


Due to the number of files/links involved, the reduced I/O overhead with hard
links is the clear winner.

Once again, thanks to all!



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:14:05 CDT