Re: Ext2 defragmentation

TenThumbs (tenthumbs@cybernex.net)
Wed, 17 Nov 1999 07:55:08 -0500

Pavel Machek wrote:
>
>
> I never found e2defrag working good enough :-(.
>
> But if you try find / on fat volume (optimized using speedisk just for
> this) and find / on ext2 volume, you'll see speed difference.
>
> Pavel

I tried this with a 1G FAT16 partition and a 1G ext2 partition on IDE drives.
While find on the FAT fs is faster than on the ext2 fs (the first time as well
as subsequent times), the difference seems to be that ext2 is modifying access
times and that data is being rewritten. The 2.2.12 kernel does this
sub-optimally. Actually, it stinks. The head scurrying all over the disk makes
a very disturbing sound.

I would think that optimizing disk writes would make most of the difference go
away.

-- 
I'm wet!  I'm wild!


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/