Fragmentation?

[Scot L. Harris]

On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 15:51, Duncan Lithgow wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 15:03 -0500, Scot L. Harris wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 14:55, Jesse Hawkins wrote:
> > > I am pretty new to linux, so this might be a
> > > rediculous question to some: Do you have/need to
> > > defrag a linux hard disk? If so, should I use included
> > > tools (and, if so, what are they) or should I
> > > purchase/download 3rd party programs.
> > > 
> > > I am using Fedora 3 on its own box (no dual-booting
> > > here folks).
> > 
> > No defrag needed.   Very common question.  :)
> 
> Isn't it more a case of 'fragmentation is minimal' and 'performance cost
> is minimal' rather than 'defrag not needed'?
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, it's something I read somewhere...


I think "fragmentation is minimal" and "performance cost is minimal"
does translate to defrag not needed.

Unlike windows drives which begin  to provide horrible performance as
their file system becomes heavily fragmented the newer file systems
under linux do not appear to suffer the same kinds of problems.  I have
a few systems that have been running for several years and there has
been no noticeable degradation in hard drive performance.

  
-- 
Scot L. Harris
webid at cfl.rr.com

I doubt, therefore I might be.