<![CDATA[This post did not contain any content.]]>This post did not contain any content.]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/topic/ef5b281d-3f52-43c1-b948-5524c68b37c6/this-post-did-not-contain-any-content.RSS for NodeFri, 15 May 2026 03:45:03 GMTSat, 09 May 2026 19:27:23 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to This post did not contain any content. on Sat, 09 May 2026 19:41:30 GMT]]>@anthropy this is dangerously close to my "correct" advice of long filenames and absolute minimum folders, max 2 levels and even avoid that if you can at all costs.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://infosec.exchange/users/codinghorror/statuses/116546318531714831https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://infosec.exchange/users/codinghorror/statuses/116546318531714831Sat, 09 May 2026 19:41:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to This post did not contain any content. on Sat, 09 May 2026 19:35:20 GMT]]>@codinghorror I'd argue folders with really good filenames is even better; more better metadata is always better, unless you end up having more folders than files.

you could argue in the end it's all a flat list of inodes anyway, but being able to bring down 5 million files into categorized chunks of 500 well named files will still be a ton easier to search through than the flat hierachy alone, even if you could filter by other metadata- I'd say at that point metadata becomes the new "folders".

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.derg.nz/users/anthropy/statuses/116546294261274824https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.derg.nz/users/anthropy/statuses/116546294261274824Sat, 09 May 2026 19:35:20 GMT