John Aldrich wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, you wrote:
> > What does "(ext2) is designed properly, so there's no need" mean?
> >
> > No filesystem can be designed to eliminate fragmentation. If
> > you are constantly "churning" on your disk, especially if your
> > disk is > 80% full, it *will* become fragged.
> >
> > Of course, high speed disks, high speed CPUs and lots of RAM
> > for cache will minimize fragmentation's effect...
> >
> > Of course, since I have high speed disks, high speed CPUs and
> > lots of RAM for cache, and the disks are < 80% full, and I
> > don't "churning" on my disks, I don't defrag my disks.
> >
> The way that Linux allocates files, the filesystem
> fragmentation is kept EXTREMELY low. If you do a manual
> FSCK on your file system, you'll see at most 3-5%
> non-contiguous, except in EXTREMELY rare situations. While
> there ARE degrag utils for EXT2, they are generally not
> necessary, as the O/S doesn't, as a rule, become fragmented
> in the first place.
> John
Does it use it use (what VMS calls) the "Contiguous Best Try"?
In other words, contiguous if possible, and if possible, in as
few fragments as possible?
Ron
--
+----------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr. Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| Jefferson, LA USA WWW : [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| |
| Most overused words: feel, cool/kewl, fun, myBlah.com |
| Most underused word: think |
+----------------------------------------------------------+
