Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:21:39 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org> Cc: shaun@crystal.com.au, adrianbsd@globalpc.net, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Symantec Ghost-like app for UFS? Message-ID: <20030219132139.56e85b5c.Alexander@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <3E534C0B.4000105@pantherdragon.org> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20030217190503.0626c2d8@globalpc.net> <3E52E523.5010606@crystal.com.au> <3E534C0B.4000105@pantherdragon.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 01:19:07 -0800
Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org> wrote:
> > boot off old disk in single user mode, mount new drive and then use
> > tar to the following... for example, to do /usr,
> >
> > cd /usr tar cvf - --one-file-system * | tar xf - -C /mnt/new_usr
>
> A "more proper" incantation would be:
>
> tar lcvf - -C /usr . | tar xpf - -C /mnt/new_usr
I would use a dump | restore combo...
> > This is the way to do it if you are moving to a different sized disk
> > and want to change the paritition sizes.
>
> It "defrags" the filesystem, too, for those so inclined to believe in
> defragging.
As we are talking about UFS: no it doesn't. Even on an empty disk and a
file with a fraction of the size of the disk you will end up with
"fragmented" blocks. UFS doesn't write the data as one large chunk, it
"spreads" it all over the disk.
If the previous filesystem switched to "optimize for space", there may
be a little benefit for some files, but generally there's absolutely no
need to "defragment" a UFS partition.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
It is easier to fix Unix than to live with NT.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030219132139.56e85b5c.Alexander>