On Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:24:32 -0600 Bob Proulx <b...@proulx.com> wrote:
> What do you mean when you say "these blocks won't be free ..."
> without defragmenting? Please explain. If you have references to
> share that explained the details that would be great.
Just think about this:
* HD original = 1000
* HD -5%..... = 950
The -5% can _only_ be used by processes (eg: to write their
log files); so for users, until a part or the whole -5% is
released by re-tuning the disk, the HD will always looks 950.
Now, if you know an underlying mechanism that silently retrocede
place from these 5% to users, please tell me what it is.
Hence "these blocks won't be free", as users only see a HD of 950.
And BTW, even root sees a HD of 950, not 1000 (but only root can
use the remaining 5% it doesn't see).
> Also as I understand it use of e2defrag is not recommended. Using
[cut blurb]
This isn't the question, try not to be silly; I took the example
of defrag pgm to illustrate the fact that the reserved 5% can
only be accessed by such a program, enforcing the fact that these
5% are _unreachable_ from anyone (except root in particular cases).
As either you wanna argue for looong sterile threads or you didn't
understood, I put it in short terms:
* HD (formatted) is 1000 (without any reservation)
* Regular 5% reservation drops its capacity to 950
* Everybody only sees and uses 950, not 1000
* The 5% resa will _never_ be available to users
Conclusion: users see and use a 950 HD, meaning if I/O
slows down when HD is 95% full, it will slow down at:
950 (HD seen capacity) * 95% = 902.5
--
<Crow-> these stupid head hunters want resumes in ms word format
<Crow-> can you write shit in tex and convert it to word?
<Overfiend> \converttoword{shit}
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
