| 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 |
Archives