| 1 |
Ok, so then reiserfs is a good choice when disk-space is a limitation. |
| 2 |
In the Gentoo Handbook is stated that reiserfs greatly outperforms ext3 when |
| 3 |
dealing with some files, often by a factor of 10x-15x. But what about "big" |
| 4 |
files? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I might just redo my moving process and turn the new partition to reiserfs. |
| 7 |
Fernando |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
On 8/13/05, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 11:29:18 +0000, Fernando Meira wrote: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> > # df |
| 14 |
> > /dev/hda1 10080488 4406076 5162344 47% /mnt/gentoo |
| 15 |
> > /dev/hda4 4763112 3948116 814996 83% /mnt/old |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > With exactly the same things in both sides, it seems that ext3 requires |
| 18 |
> > *much* more space ~450M. |
| 19 |
> > Can this be right, or I messed up somewhere...?? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> It's right if you have a lot of small files. Reiserfs uses tail packing |
| 22 |
> (unless mounted with the notail option) to greatly reduce the amount of |
| 23 |
> space occupied by small files, at the expense of some performance. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> -- |
| 27 |
> Neil Bothwick |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Just don't give away the homeworld! |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> |
Archives