From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Feb 13 03:40:06 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B521F106564A
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 03:40:06 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dieterbsd@engineer.com)
Received: from imr-db01.mx.aol.com (imr-db01.mx.aol.com [205.188.91.95])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E33B8FC0A
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 03:40:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from imo-da03.mx.aol.com (imo-da03.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.201])
	by imr-db01.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p1D3e5C3024902
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:40:05 -0500
Received: from dieterbsd@engineer.com
	by imo-da03.mx.aol.com  (mail_out_v42.9.) id n.ff6.586c06e (55742)
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:40:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com
	[64.12.95.103]) by cia-md05.mx.aol.com (v129.7) with ESMTP id
	MAILCIAMD051-b2cd4d57528e32; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:40:00 -0500
Received: from web-mmc-d04 (web-mmc-d04.sim.aol.com [205.188.103.94]) by
	smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com (v129.8) with ESMTP id
	MAILSMTPRLYME025-b2cd4d57528e32; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:39:58 -0500
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:39:58 -0500
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
X-AOL-IP: 67.206.170.129
X-MB-Message-Type: User
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: dieterbsd@engineer.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Mail.com Webmail 33222-STANDARD
Received: from 67.206.170.129 by web-mmc-d04.sysops.aol.com (205.188.103.94)
	with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:39:58 -0500
Message-Id: <8CD9946D22CB89E-1B70-1C204@web-mmc-d04.sysops.aol.com>
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-AOL-SENDER: dieterbsd@engineer.com
Subject: Re: memstick.img is bloated with 7% 2K blocks of nulls
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 03:40:06 -0000

Tim Kientzle wrote:
> The current UFS code is designed to leave enough "slack space" to
> support future file writes.

What if you turned the knob all the way down and had just one
cylinder group?  I assume that newfs would need to be fixed to
allow this, but would anything break?

The current limits are also wasteful for normal read/write
filesystems with large files.  Too many cylinder groups, too many
inodes, block/frag size too small, etc...