> What I have on there is videos. When I tried to compress some and test, > it was basically the same size. I guess videos don't compress to much? >
No videos don't compress well at all, compressing video files is just a waste of cpu cycles :) > When I put this in, I'm going to redo the whole thing. Ages ago when I > was green all over and not just around the gills, I created a /data > directory and that is where I stored "stuff". My new plan, the new > drive will become /home and I will be putting things where they should > have been to begin with. I plan to reorganize this whole mess I created > ages ago. That video directory is HUGE tho. > > root@fireball / # du -shc /data/Videos/ > 703G /data/Videos/ > 703G total > root@fireball / # > > While I am at it. You should have a good answer for this one. What is > a good file system for this sort of thing? I been using ext4 but it > sure does use a lot of space for its overhead. As far as files go, most > will likely be videos. I do have other files but when compared to the > number of videos, they are close to nothing. The files system for the > current 1Tb, spread across two drives with LVM, uses about 75Gbs for the > file system thingy. That's a pretty good bit to me. I may lose more > than 200Gbs on this 3Tb drive. O_O I use XFS on my NAS-Box for the drives that only hold video files and I am pretty happy with it. The advantage of XFS is, that it is very fast when working with large files. For everything else I use ext4, pretty happy with that too.
