1 |
At Sat, 24 May 2008 16:49:09 -0500 reader@×××××××.com wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Is there any way to speed up the du command? I mean short of having |
4 |
> cron run it on target directories and store results. (not really |
5 |
> speeding up but at least not having to wait for a result) |
6 |
> |
7 |
> I've seen various mention of du being slow but don't recall any |
8 |
> mentions of how to speed it up. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I use Reiserfs with default sizes. In some situations like a large |
11 |
> cache of nntp messages of several GB. I might wait 5-10 minutes or more |
12 |
> for du to get the size of the directory. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Are there other file systems that can return a result of `du' faster? |
15 |
> |
16 |
> I'm curious how `df' computes sizes so much quicker. Even after |
17 |
> rm'ing a large amount of data... `df' sees the difference right away. |
18 |
|
19 |
I can't help with speeding up du, but can explain df's speed. |
20 |
This information is kept in the superblock. Each operation that |
21 |
changes size updates the superblock and df just reads the result. |
22 |
(In a sense it is like your cron soln above for du :-) .) |
23 |
|
24 |
> Or maybe there is some other tool or technique that can quickly tell |
25 |
> me the size of a directory or set of directories. |
26 |
|
27 |
allan |
28 |
-- |
29 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |