On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:21:40PM -0500, Scott wrote: > As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems > very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition > would make a difference on at what percentage full one would > start to notice problems. > > In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of > work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think > with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher > percentage before trouble started. > > It makes sense to me anyway :)
That's what one would like, but UFS doesn't work that way. It's allocation algorithm assumes 10% of the disk is free -- regardless of actual size. Or so I've been told (multiple times). IMHO this is a bit ridiculous -- I mean, given 1 TB of space (nearly feasible for a home server right now), why would an FS allocator need 10% of that if the files on the volume are averaging 10 MB? But then again, and this is worth noting -- I'm certainly nowhere near as clueful as others on how to design a stable & fast file system. Seeing as UFS1 is still in use, and has been for the last 20 years (think about it!), I think maybe the tradeoff might make sense to an expert... BTW, note that you really need to consider the perfomance drop for yourself -- like others said, if the files on the volume change infrequently, performance matters little, and space more so. --Stijn -- This sentence contradicts itself -- no actually it doesn't. -- Hofstadter
pgpQOKPgJOqnR.pgp
Description: PGP signature