Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:17:34 -0400 (EDT) From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> To: Tom <tom@sdf.com> Cc: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>, mimo@interdata.com.pl, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@postgreSQL.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :( Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980520131553.14056W-100000@hub.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980520094022.12309C-100000@misery.sdf.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 20 May 1998, Tom wrote: > > On Wed, 20 May 1998, The Hermit Hacker wrote: > > > One of the things that the Unix FS does is auto-defragmenting, at > > least the UFS one does. Whenever the system is idle (from my > > understanding), the kernel uses that time to clean up the file systems, to > > reduce the file system fragmentation. > > No, that doesn't happen. The only way to eliminate fragmentation is a > dump/newfs/restore cycle. UFS does do fragmentation avoidance (which is > reason UFS filesystems have a 10% reserve). Okay, then we have two different understandings of this. My understanding was that the 10% reserve gave the OS a 'temp area' in which to move blocks to/from so that it could defrag on the fly... Am CC'ng this into freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org for a "third opinion"...am willing to admit I'm wrong *grin* To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980520131553.14056W-100000>