The US Salary Calculator is a great tool for those who want to quickly review salary examples for a specific US state. You can select your filing status, how often you are paid so you can calculate how much your annual salary is based on your hourly rate etc. This is useful for quickly reviewing different salaries and how changes to income affect your Federal income tax calculations, State Income tax calculations and Medicare etc.
Use the US Salary Calculator. The US salary comparison calculator is very popular with jobseekers and those looking to compare salaries in different jobs or different income tax calculations and deductions in different states. The salary comparison calculator allows you to compare up to 6 salaries side by side. You can select different states and different tax years to produce a range of different salary comparisons for different filer status single, married filing jointly, widower etc.
This tool uses standard setting to support standard comparison. The US Tax Calculator is a great tool for producing detailed tax and salary calculations. The Tax Calculator allows you to enter specific details including your filer status, number of children, different states, your retirement funds, any withholding so amounts, FICA and other elements that support a more detailed tax calculation.
This tool is particularly useful for those preparing their annual tax return as each of the calculations is specifically detailed so you can see how tax credits are applied, how certain tax rates and thresholds are used and how each income tax deduction is calculated.
Use the US Tax Calculator. Update:When asked in IRC, people were asking about upgrading it to ext4, which has 64k limit and of course you can even get past that too. Or kernel hacking to change the limit. Update:How about splitting the user base into folders based on the userid range. Meaning in one folder, in the other like that. This seems to be simple. What do you say, guys? That limit is per-directory, not for the whole filesystem, so you could work around it by further sub-dividing things.
For instance instead of having all the user subdirectories in the same directory split them per the first two characters of the name so you have something like:. Even better would be to create some form of hash of the names and use that for the division. This way you'll get a better spread amongst the directories instead of, with the initial letters example, "da" being very full and "zz" completely empty.
For instance if you take the CRC or MD5 the name and use the first 8 bits you'll get somethnig like:. This can be extended to further depths as needed, for instance like so if using the username not a hash value:. This method is used in many places like squid's cache, to copy Ludwig's example, and the local caches of web browsers. Moving to another filesystem ext4 or reiser for instance will remove this inefficiency reiser searches directories with a binary-split algorimth so long directories are handled much more efficiently, ext4 may do too as well as the fixed limit per directory.
Find a criterion that splits your data into manageable chunks of similar size. Top level directory is the first hex-digit, second level is the next two hex-digits, and the file name is the remaining hex-digits. You do have a better solution - use a different filesystem, there are plenty available, many of which are optimised for different tasks.
As you pointed out ReiserFS is optimised for handling lots of files in a directory. See here for a comparison of filesystems. Just be glad you're not stuck with NTFS which is truly abysmal for lots of files in a directory.
I'd recommend JFS as a replacement if you don't fancy using the relatively new but apparently stable ext4 FS. Is the profile image small? What about putting it in the database with the rest of the profile data?
This might not be the best option for you, but worth considering Primary reason is that wildcard expansion on the command line, will result in "Too many arguments" errors resulting in much pain when trying to work with these directories.
Go for a solution that makes a deeper but narrower tree, e. This will partition the data in directories, which gives a fast directory lookup for each of the three levels. Not an immediate answer to your problem, but something to watch for future reference is the OpenBSD linked project called 'Epitome'. All of your data is stored in a data store as hashed blocks, removing non-unique blocks to cut down on space usage, and allows you to essentially forget about the storage mechanism as you can simply request the content from the data store by UUID.
We had a similar problem, the solution - as mentioned previously - is to create a hierarchy of directories. Of course if you have a complex application which relies on a flat directory structure, you'll probably need a lot of patching. So it's good to know that there is a workaround, use symlinks which doesn't have the mentioned 32k limit.
Then you have plenty of time to fix the app Omit the last 2 digits or else it just gets slightly ridiculous. Separate the stamp into sets of 4 the directory count shouldn't reach more than - if you want to you could separate it differently.
Then also check the amount within the dir before uploading, if it's getting a large number of uploads i. This does end up with a large number of directories, but it can be really useful for handling file revisions.
For example, if a user wants to use a new profile picture, you still have the old timestamped version of the older one in-case they wish to undo the changes its not just over-written. I'd suggest deciding how many maximum subdirectories you want to or can have in the parent folder. JFS is another option. I remember switching from XFS to JFS years ago for a database project don't use either these days but I can't remember for the life of me why I did so.
Benchmark both, see which would perform best in your situation. Hi guys, do you know of any ways where we can actually find out how many subfolders we currently have inside of 1 folder?
So, if you wanted to find the link count which is the limit, rather than strictly directories , for all directories inside a certain folder, you could use: find.
The extent of my experience with XFS has been on 2 separate centos 5. Both would crumble and corrupt the file system causing data loss when under heavy load. We never really bothered to look into why, just went back to ext and have been fine since. This happened earlier this year. Paladin wrote: The extent of my experience with XFS has been on 2 separate centos 5. XFS is highly threaded and it expects data to be committed when it asks.
If the device is lying about things, you'll trigger all kinds of journal and data smashing that wouldn't occur in a somewhat more serial style filesystem like ext3.
Make more file systems? Originally posted by hyeteck: Hi, We are getting close to the 32k limit for number of files in a single folder on ext3 filesystem. Originally posted by Paladin: I don't remember seeing anyone with a need for that kind of database design before. Ars Legatus Legionis et Subscriptor.
What do you need 32k databases for? Originally posted by sryan2k1: What do you need 32k databases for? Originally posted by ugawd: We made the switch to xfs for our app that creates entirely too many subdirectories. Originally posted by ronelson: quote:. Hairy Gunt. Originally posted by sryan2k1: quote:. Originally posted by hyeteck: quote:. Matt Wallis. Ars Scholae Palatinae et Subscriptor. Matt Wallis wrote:.
0コメント