| 1 |
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 19:29, José Pablo Ezequiel Fernández wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 28 September 2005 12:21, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: |
| 3 |
> > no, but I noticed, that reiserfs needs much less space with small files |
| 4 |
> > (like portage tree) than ext2/3. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Any numbers you can post ? |
| 7 |
> -- |
| 8 |
> José Pablo Ezequiel Fernández |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
not real numbers, but a very convincing experience: |
| 12 |
some yoears ago, when I was a slackware user, I had a 10gig harddisk, that was |
| 13 |
pretty full - mostly small to medium sized files. |
| 14 |
I switched from ext2 to reiserfs and freed 2gb. |
| 15 |
Yep, that is true. Instead of 9gb with ext2, my installation only needed 7gb |
| 16 |
with reiserfs. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Since that time, I am a reiserfs-only user. |
| 19 |
Harddisks are big - but never big enough. |
| 20 |
Although they get cheaper per megabyte, but they grow so fast, that they are |
| 21 |
almost always a little bit too expensive to just buy another one ;) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives