Here's the deal. Somewhere someplace it has been written that "linux doesn't fragment". And everyone knows that. I have yet to see any real proof of this, I'd run my own tests, but funny thing, most of these file systems don't have a way to measure fragmentation. Why? They don't fragment. Can you prove it? no. Its damn circular.
I would really really really like to see some factual evidence. I've never found any. The best I can tell you is to switch to a different file system. The standard way to defragment in linux is to copy all your files to a second drive, and then copy them back. When you do that you might as well change to XFS and never have to worry again. I've heard JFS can defrag on line, not sure. But I run XFS and don't have to worry. I can measure my fragmentation, and fix it. Hope that helps. Ryan - On Tuesday 18 April 2006 12:26, Damir Perisa wrote: > Tuesday 18 April 2006 21:00, RedShift wrote: > | Don't worry about it. Fragmentation doesn't really have any effect > | on linux filesystems. > > it horribly has... my reiser3 root-fs is horribly fragmented and > access times are very bad... if i copy a whole dir to a new place and > move it back, it becomes around 10x faster. > > | There are tools out there that can > | defragment your filesystem, but I wouldn't test them out on > | production data :-P > > can you point me to a manual to do so for reiserfs? > > | I know, it takes a while to get used to not having to care about > | fragmentation anymore, but now I love it! > > seems you were more lucky choosing a fs. reiser3 is avery bad chooice, > i know now. > > thx in advance, > > Damir _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
