On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 03:35:05PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:30:15 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote: > > > Any tips on this? Does it make sense to use a special file system just > > for the portage tree? What would be best? Would it help to re-create > > this file system from time to time in case it gets slower with every > > sync? > > I use an ext2 filesystem for portage, it's still the fastest out there. > Journals are unnecessary because its such a small filesystem, and if it > does get damaged I can just reformat and sync again.
I use an ext2 partition in a 500MB file image on most of my computers. Its important to check the inode count on such small filesytem, as mke2fs' default inode ration for such size is 4096, which is too low for portage: dd bs=$((500*1024*1024)) count=1 if=/dev/zero of=/usr/img_portage mke2fs -f -b1024 -i2048 /usr/img_portage fstab: /usr/img_portage /usr/portage/ ext2 loop,noatime 0 0 (this is from desktop, on servers I usually only mount it manually when emerging) # df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/loop0 469M 306M 139M 69% /usr/portage # df -i Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/loop0 256032 152044 103988 60% /usr/portage yoyo
