On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:29:19PM +0100, David du Colombier wrote:
>
> You should probably try to compare with "du -sh".
BTW, I have "played" with du(1) since it answers partially (Erik gave
data) about the optimization of blocksize. Namely the "-b" option. If I
understand correctly, this does take only "data" block, so no inode or
whatever, but may give a clue about the optimization of blocksize. So:
term% du -s /
364996379 /
term% du -s -b 2048 /
365017964 /
term% du -s -b 8192 /
365080272 /
term% du -s -b 512 /
365002735 /
Well... on this partial evaluation, the winner is 1024, but for 80k,
not a lot to shout about.
For the occupation of fossil, with 8kb:
fsys blocks: total=126524 used=92045(72.7%) free=34464(27.2%) lost=15(0.0%)
So I have roughly twice the size of files in fossil occupation: fossil,
754 Mb, for 365 Mb of "real" data.
I don't get it!
--
Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
http://www.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
