Hello, On Sun, 29 Sep 2013, Duaine Hechler wrote:
On 09/29/2013 10:49 PM, Duaine Hechler wrote:
I am upgrading from 500GB to 1TB drives. The 500GB drives are 99% full.
1TB's not worth the hassle these days. 2TB cost little more. E.g. (as you're in the US) at newegg 1TB costs $70 and up, 2TB for $85 and up, and 3TB for $120 and up. The actual prices may vary, but the scheme (i.e. the relation between 1/2/3TB will be almost the same regardless of the actual vendor). 4TB is still quite unproportionally expensive.
After I do the initial upgrade, how is the data spread across the drive ?
Usually, if you partition the drive, format the partitions and then copy the data onto it, it'll fill the partitions (each) from "front to back".
Ultimately, I'm trying to figure out - is the front of the drive going to get the brunt of the work or is the data going to be scattered across the drive.
Linux FSen generally spread files soon across the whole partition (only on the initial sequential write of files it get's filled from the "front" on) and the metadata is (unlike e.g. FAT's FAT and NTFS' MFT[0]) also spread out and near the data.
General layout: root (/) swap /home (rest of drive)
Forgot about the FS I'm using - which is the ReiserFS.
Dump it. You're riding a dead horse. From WP: | Namesys considered ReiserFS (now occasionally referred to as Reiser3) | stable and feature-complete and, with the exception of security | updates and critical bug fixes, ceased development on it to | concentrate on its successor, Reiser4. Namesys went out of business in | 2008 after Reiser was charged with the murder of his wife. However, | volunteers continue to work on the open source project.[4] And migrating to a new disk is the perfect opportunity to change the filesystem too. I recommend ext3 (can be upgraded to ext4 at any time), much like using 'tune2fs -j' to move from ext2 to ext3 [1], but directly choosing ext4 would be good as well. And SUSE considers the _supported_ feature set of btrfs (as supported in SLES) stable, so that might be an alternative besides ext3/ext4. -dnh [0] not sure if that's still the case, ISTR it was that the MFT had one copy at the start and one at the end of the partition, subjecting those disc regions to more IO. [1] yeah, minus some ext3 features, but a lot of that can be done by other tune2fs operations and mount-options. PS: Actually: I do use reiserfs again. As a loop-mounted newsspool lying on an ext3 like the rest of my stuff (except the SSD, that's ext4) ;) # losetup -a /dev/loop0: [0876]:667931 (/data/spool/news_reiserfs.img) # df -hi ### trimmed /dev/sdh6 1.8M 1.4M 397K 78% /data /dev/loop0 0 0 0 - /data/spool/news # df -Th ### trimmed /dev/sdh6 ext3 1.8T 1.7T 21G 99% /data /dev/loop0 reiserfs 8.0G 5.8G 2.3G 73% /data/spool/news /data is a FS rather tuned to holding large files and not suited for the million(s?) or so inodes needed for my newsspool ;) But I think I'll migrate the spool to a new image with ext4 or btrfs ;) -- How do we persuade new users that spreading fonts across the page like peanut butter across hot toast is not necessarily the route to typographic excellence? -- Peter Flynn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org