| 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 |
Archives