lastlog devours universe
Michael Wiktowy
mwiktowy at gmx.net
Wed Jun 8 22:39:36 UTC 2005
Jesse Keating wrote:
>On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 16:37 -0400, Michael Wiktowy wrote:
>
>
>>In your experience, is there a reason not to use --sparse in most occasions?
>>
>>
>And then we have an even longer thread about tar changing it's default
>behavior and pissing off even MORE admins who have been using tar for
>decades on not just Linux. That is a VERY silly suggestion.
>
>
Well ... long threads are fine if they stay constructive and informative.
I'll ask again because I honestly don't know the answer:
Is there a reason not to use --sparse in most occasions?
Call me an ignorant newb if it makes you feel better, but I would like
an answer from someone knowledgable since all my Googling indicates:
- there is just a slight slowdown since it has to read the file twice
(Andy Ross' test only covered one condition ... I would imagine tarring
a 1.4TB file takes a long time *any* way you do it.)
- there is a large slowdown on compressing a sparse file
- there is some indication that sparse file handling should be automatic
and the --sparse option removed completely
Ref:
http://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_mono/tar.html#SEC132
http://www.it.cas.cz/manual/tar/html_node/tar_121.html
/Mike
More information about the test
mailing list