From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jul 28 18:33:33 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B28CB16A41F
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:33:33 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from freminlins@gmail.com)
Received: from nproxy.gmail.com (nproxy.gmail.com [64.233.182.203])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B4E043D49
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:33:32 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from freminlins@gmail.com)
Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x37so105855nfc
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=iH9m7rMwTwCSEPjOnOIRKNjGw6aC9h1g03RBmXwp1q/dVFT8Rp3MtROnUkT2ri8FPkASmQ7YR5cCq6ELKfHv9tdTqaNXoB3trLc2vlDD55UcDMeup7lMpNQGxiaLYubR7v4vFBnqX6HIoieRE29RaFaqkkcxQPHdbOnpBHBfG48=
Received: by 10.48.1.18 with SMTP id 18mr85082nfa;
	Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.48.239.11 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <eeef1a4c05072811336b86641a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:33:31 +0100
From: Freminlins <freminlins@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <060c01c59397$2876b460$c901a8c0@workdog>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <eeef1a4c050728094127f97afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<060c01c59397$2876b460$c901a8c0@workdog>
Subject: Re: defragmentation in FreeBSD 4.11
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Freminlins <freminlins@gmail.com>
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:33:33 -0000

Gayn Winters wrote:
=20
> What I get from reading this article is that if the use of the file
> system is to store lots of small files, then use a small block size.  Am
> I missing something?

No and yes! There is a minimum block and fragment size. In this case
there were not enough contiguous fragments to enable an 8K file to be
created. Without checking I believe Solaris uses 8K blocks.

> Also, in most situations, buying a big enough disk is far better than
> worrying about what happens when a not-big-enough disk starts to get
> full.

Indeed. But... in the case I linked to there was apparently plenty of
free space, just not enough free contiguous space. The author also
implies that a bigger disk would not solve the problem:

  "it creates and deletes tons of small files and thus the fragmentation=20
  over a period of time."

As mentioned though I have never seen this myself despite running very
busy mail and web servers with what must be billions of files being
created/deleted in that time.

It certainly grabbed my attention so I thought it may be of interest to oth=
ers.

> -gayn

Frem.