Christian Trefzer wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 10:57:35AM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Wil Reichert wrote:
Any idea how the fragmentation resulting from re-syncing the tree
affects performance over time?
Yes, it does affect it a lot. I have no idea how much, and I've never
benchmarked it, but purely subjectively, my portage has gotten slower
over time.
Delayed allocation still performs a lot better here than the v3
"immediate" allocation. In addition, tree balancing operations are
performed on flush as well, so what you get on disk is basically an
almost-optimal tree. Of course, this will change a bit over time, but
with v4 it takes a lot longer for that to happen than with v3 afaict.
There _has_ been some worthwile development in the meantime : )
Hmm. The thing is, I don't remember v3 slowing down much at all,
whereas v4 slowed down pretty dramatically after the first few weeks.
It does seem pretty stable now, though, and it doesn't seem to be
getting any slower.
I've had this particular FS since... hmm... Is there an FS tool to
check mkfs time? I think it's a year now, but I'd like to be sure.
If not, I'll just find the oldest file, but the clock on this machine
isn't reliable (have to set it with NTP every boot)...
