1 |
On 2/8/06, Bob Sanders <rsanders@×××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> It was never designed to work like a WinXX defragger. The man page states |
4 |
> exactly what it will do, and consolidating space is not part of it's |
5 |
> design. |
6 |
|
7 |
Yes, I've read the man page, and I understood it. |
8 |
|
9 |
Also, I didn't mean to deride xfs or xfs_fsr/fsr_xfs, so please don't |
10 |
take it personally. It is the *only* filesystem that offers a online |
11 |
defrag tool for linux today, and that is a big bonus. My complaint is |
12 |
more of a wish list than anything else. But it isn't a big enough |
13 |
wish for me to spend time working on it myself! |
14 |
|
15 |
> xfs_fsr/fsr_xfs was designed to deal with multi-gigabyte and terabyte files. Not |
16 |
> to free up space in small partitions. |
17 |
|
18 |
My comment about "not worth running" should have been qualified to |
19 |
small filesystems with small files (like root, ported, et al). |
20 |
|
21 |
But actually, it is with the handling of multi-gigabyte files that I |
22 |
find it lacking. My VMWare virtual disk images are 10-20G. So if I |
23 |
don't have at least 20G of free space on a filesystem, I cannot |
24 |
defragment those. Moreover, since xfs_fsr doesn't consolidate free |
25 |
space, it is probable that no improvements could be made to those |
26 |
files even if I have 50G free, since there are likely to be some files |
27 |
spread out over the disk if the filesystem has been in use for any |
28 |
length of time. |
29 |
|
30 |
-Richard |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |