From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 7 06:11:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEB8F16A4CE for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 06:11:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.midgard.homeip.net (h201n1fls24o1048.bredband.comhem.se [212.181.162.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C3B9D43D1D for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 06:11:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ertr1013@student.uu.se) Received: (qmail 65160 invoked by uid 1001); 7 Feb 2004 14:11:03 -0000 Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:11:03 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson To: Stijn Hoop Message-ID: <20040207141103.GA65140@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> Mail-Followup-To: Stijn Hoop , Garrett Wollman , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Claus Guttesen References: <20040206072244.GT908@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <20040206084458.53207.qmail@web14101.mail.yahoo.com> <200402061857.i16IvBOc050219@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20040207131735.GA2803@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040207131735.GA2803@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Claus Guttesen cc: Garrett Wollman Subject: Re: Reserved space (WAS: How to calculate bsdlabel size) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 14:11:07 -0000 On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 02:17:35PM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 01:57:11PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > < said: > > > > > Does the algorithm(s) rely only on percentage of free > > > space? On a five TB (netto) filesystem eigth percent > > > is approx. 410 GB which seems quite alot. > > > > A good Data Structures text will prove to you that the efficiency of > > hashing algorithms of the sort that the UFS block allocator uses > > depends only on the occupancy ratio and not on the absolute number of > > free hash slots. > > Which translates into what wrt this question? That the 8% of free space > is really necessary for the UFS block allocator to function efficiently? Yes, that is exactly what it translates to. -- Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se