> As a general comment (not addressed to Tim): There _is_ a downside > to sparsifying files. If you take a sparse file and start filling > in the holes, the net result will be very badly fragmented and hence > have very poor sequential I/O performance. If you're never going to > update a file then making it sparse makes sense, if you will be > updating it, you will get better performance by making it non-sparse.
Except for database tables how common is this? And for such files how important is the sequntial I/O performance? For database tables perhaps there is a size range where not making them sparse helps but for really large tables you wouldn't want to fill in the holes. I suspect that making not writing zeroes the default would actually help overall performance. _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
