| 1 |
Neil Bothwick writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:35:42 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > - best filesystem for portage? something compressed or with small |
| 5 |
> > > cluster size maybe. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > I think reiserfs with the notail option is recommended. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> The data I've seen indicates that ext2 is fastest, that's what I use. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I thought the small files of the portage tree especially profit from the |
| 12 |
notail option in reiserfs? Did you change the block size? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> There's no need for journalling on the portage tree, it's small enough |
| 15 |
> to fsck quickly and if it does get broken, reformat and resync. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Would the journaling overhead be noticeable? |
| 18 |
I also had used ext2 for my portage tree first, then I read somewhere that |
| 19 |
reiserfs would be the best. BTW, I have distfiles and pkgdir somewhere |
| 20 |
else, if not the fsck would not be so fast. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Just for fun, I just copied my $PORTDIR into my tmpfs, emerge -DpN @system |
| 23 |
@world takes between 81 and 53 seconds. With reiserfs, I get 130 seconds |
| 24 |
first ($PORTDIR was unmounted first and mounted again to clear the |
| 25 |
caches), and 57 seconds in the second attempt. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I had expected that tmpfs would be even faster. I think I just keep it the |
| 28 |
way it is now. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Wonko |
Archives