Disk defragmenter in Linux
Mike McCarty
mike.mccarty at sbcglobal.net
Fri Dec 23 20:18:17 UTC 2005
Tim wrote:
> Tim:
>
>>>But such (static) data doesn't get fragmented, it stays as it was
>>>original written. It's changing files that become fragmented, and
>>>newly created ones
>
>
>
> Mike McCarty:
>
>>Er? Perhaps what Tony wrote was in error, but his understanding is
>>the same as mine. The ext3 tends to fragment files as it writes them.
>
>
> It would only be fragmenting the files that it writes to, not the ones
> already on the disk. Sure, a fragmented word processor document might
> take a bit longer to open (though it'd have to be a large file for you
> to notice), but the word processor is going to take just as long to
> start up as it ever did. Likewise with all the other unmodified files
> on the drive (most of the OS and applications). Writing a fragmented
> file doesn't shuffle everything else around.
I wasn't saying that. But writing to the files *during installation*
might result in fragmentation.
> Things like large mail spool files have been about the only thing that
> strike me as a fragmentation issue. Most other files are rather small.
True.
>>And what you wrote doesn't address the directories, which get appended
>>to, and presumably fragmented, at the time they are creat
>
>
> I was under the impression that the directory structure was recorded in
> manner that's different from how the files are stored.
You may know something that I do not. I thought everything was inodes.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
More information about the users
mailing list