From owner-freebsd-chat  Sat Jan 26  0:47:31 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F5D37B404
	for <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org>; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:47:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pool0040.cvx40-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.42.40] helo=mindspring.com)
	by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 16UOUW-00049r-00; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:47:16 -0800
Message-ID: <3C526D0F.A27A59E7@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:47:11 -0800
From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony}  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net>
Cc: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>,
	Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1012390758.50933b@mired.org>,
	chip <chip@wiegand.org>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Bad disk partitioning policies (was: "Re: FreeBSD Intaller (was  
 "Re: ... RedHat ...")")
References: <20020123124025.A60889@HAL9000.wox.org> <3C4F5BEE.294FDCF5@mindspring.com> <20020123223104.SM01952@there> <p0510122eb875d9456cf4@[10.0.1.3]> <15440.35155.637495.417404@guru.mired.org> <p0510123fb876493753e0@[10.0.1.3]> <15440.53202.747536.126815@guru.mired.org> <p05101242b876db6cd5d7@[10.0.1.3]> <15441.17382.77737.291074@guru.mired.org> <p05101245b8771d04e19b@[10.0.1.3]> <20020125212742.C75216@over-yonder.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-chat.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-chat>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-chat>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

"Matthew D. Fuller" wrote:
> The space allocation isn't intended to 'keep user-level program from
> filling up the disk', it's intended to allow the fragmentation-avoidance
> to work.  Size doesn't matter; percentage does.  I've heard somewhere
> (from Terry, I think) that 15% is the 'optimal' setting for this, and
> 10% was a compromise that wasn't too far below optimal, but gave that 5%
> of extra available space.  8% is the current default in newfs(8).

Donald Knuth, "Seminumerical Algorithms: Sorting and Searching".

85% of load is the point at which a perfect hash starts getting
collisions from random data with a probabiliy of higher than 1.005.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message