Re: [reiserfs-list] Mutt performance with Maildir format: was ReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

2001-05-09 Thread Ragnar Kjørstad
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:26:23PM +0200, Philippe Gramoulle wrote: Just wanted to let you know my benchmarks on a dual 650Mhz, SCSI disks and 2.4.4 + 1.5 Go RAM mbox file of 57,7 Mo exploded into 17431 mails. /usr/bin/time mutt -f /var/spool/mail/toor -e 'set quit=yes; exec quit' gives

Re: [reiserfs-list] resize_reiserfs update

2001-05-09 Thread Chris Wakefield
Greetings Alex. Thanks for your reply. This is the current output of #cat /etc/mtab: /dev/hde11 / reiserfs rw 0 0 proc /proc proc rw 0 0 none /proc/bus/usb usbdevfs rw 0 0 none /dev/shm shm rw 0 0 The only mount related commands I've issued were:

[reiserfs-list] slides of reiserfs talk

2001-05-09 Thread Hans Reiser
Welcome Constantin, please take a look at the slides. Hans

Re: [reiserfs-list] Mutt performance with Maildir format: wasReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

2001-05-09 Thread Chris Mason
On Wednesday, May 09, 2001 04:54:00 AM -0700 Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ragnar Kjørstad wrote: On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:26:23PM +0200, Philippe Gramoulle wrote: Just wanted to let you know my benchmarks on a dual 650Mhz, SCSI disks and 2.4.4 + 1.5 Go RAM mbox file of

Re: [reiserfs-list] Mutt performance with Maildir format: wasReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

2001-05-09 Thread Hans Reiser
Chris Mason wrote: On Wednesday, May 09, 2001 04:54:00 AM -0700 Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ragnar Kjørstad wrote: On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:26:23PM +0200, Philippe Gramoulle wrote: Just wanted to let you know my benchmarks on a dual 650Mhz, SCSI disks and 2.4.4 + 1.5 Go

Re: [reiserfs-list] Here we go again

2001-05-09 Thread Vladimir V. Saveliev
Hi Chris Mason wrote: Did you change this to work so? I guess no, because this change would touch not only reiserfs_get_block but few other things. As in 3.5 - every pointer still had to exist. To be more pricise, file can have hole (no indirect items) only at its end. yes, it

Re: [reiserfs-list] Here we go again

2001-05-09 Thread Chris Mason
On Thursday, May 10, 2001 02:22:39 AM +0400 Vladimir V. Saveliev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Chris Mason wrote: Did you change this to work so? I guess no, because this change would touch not only reiserfs_get_block but few other things. As in 3.5 - every pointer still had to