Re: [SLE] Is the hard disk full? Cause found
But I would simply switch to reiserfs. You said:
As the freedb database contains zillions of small files it
That's perfect for reiserfs. Ideal for you ;-)
At least, try, I'd like to know if the untarring runs faster on reiserfs under the same conditions - I'm very curious, it should be much faster ;-)
- -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
Thanks! I have formatted that partiton to reiserfs. Untaring was MUCH faster. Not on the same computer, but on another one 10-15 minutes vs. 6-8 hours. I have two questions: 1. What about the block size on reiserfs? The default is 4096. Should not I change to smaller value? Or on reiserfs this thing works differently? 2. df and du gave different results for the filesystem (10 GB partition). "df -h" said that the used space on the reiser was 2.5 GB and about 7 GB was free (available). However "du -sh freedb" reported 7.5 GB. Why is this? Thanks, IG ___________________________________________________________________________ Pénzügyi szolgáltatás és hiteligénylés interneten keresztül a nap 24 órájában az [origo]-n. www.klikkbank.hu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-03-01 at 10:36 +0100, Istvan Gabor wrote:
But I would simply switch to reiserfs. You said:
As the freedb database contains zillions of small files it
That's perfect for reiserfs. Ideal for you ;-)
At least, try, I'd like to know if the untarring runs faster on reiserfs under the same conditions - I'm very curious, it should be much faster ;-)
Thanks! I have formatted that partiton to reiserfs. Untaring was MUCH faster. Not on the same computer, but on another one 10-15 minutes vs. 6-8 hours.
A big difference :-)
I have two questions: 1. What about the block size on reiserfs? The default is 4096. Should not I change to smaller value? Or on reiserfs this thing works differently?
Yes, it works diferently. If the file is very small, it doesn't go there, and small files can share partial blocks. There is no need to tune reiserfs that way.
2. df and du gave different results for the filesystem (10 GB partition). "df -h" said that the used space on the reiser was 2.5 GB and about 7 GB was free (available). However "du -sh freedb" reported 7.5 GB. Why is this?
Because du uses estimated block size, and the calculation is wrong for reiserfs. See this thread: http://lists.suse.com/archive/suse-linux-e/2005-Oct/2466.html Subject: [SLE] Space used by files on a reiser partitition. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFEBbjztTMYHG2NR9URAscoAKCY1Ax/vcqvem0fP0dPexi39/WrFwCdGUrU F7snSwgkZBISyyadocxdj9A= =wOzi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2. df and du gave different results for the filesystem (10 GB partition). "df -h" said that the used space on the reiser was 2.5 GB and about 7 GB was free (available). However "du - sh freedb" reported 7.5 GB. Why is this?
Because du uses estimated block size, and the calculation is wrong for reiserfs.
Thank you. # du -sh sda4/freedb 7.5G sda4/freedb I understand that du counts the sizes incorrectly. But there is another strangeness here: # df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda4 9.4G 2.2G 7.2G 23% /home/user/sda4 Before untaring the archive its size was 3.2 GB. Is it possible that after untaring its size became smaller? Or df also reports false values? Thanks, IG ___________________________________________________________________________ [origo] klikkbank lakossági számlacsomag havi 199 Ft-ért, bankkártya éves díj nélkül! www.klikkbank.hu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Thursday 2006-03-02 at 23:40 +0100, Istvan Gabor wrote:
I understand that du counts the sizes incorrectly. But there is another strangeness here:
# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda4 9.4G 2.2G 7.2G 23% /home/user/sda4
Before untaring the archive its size was 3.2 GB. Is it possible that after untaring its size became smaller? Or df also reports false values?
I would have to study that one to know for certain. You can also measure the space used with "mc". I think it calculates size summing up all files found. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFEB5h1tTMYHG2NR9URAmlqAJ97uE8d2YkR3/wjpD1QNrrPsPLJPQCfeDRL 1QmrqDVaadoWZDrxXO2lV4Q= =89Kh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2006-03-02 at 23:40 +0100, Istvan Gabor wrote:
I understand that du counts the sizes incorrectly. But there is another strangeness here:
# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda4 9.4G 2.2G 7.2G 23% /home/user/sda4
Before untaring the archive its size was 3.2 GB. Is it possible that after untaring its size became smaller? Or df also reports false values?
I would have to study that one to know for certain.
You can also measure the space used with "mc". I think it calculates size summing up all files found.
Yes, untaring an archive can result in smaller bytes. tar a simple text/ascii file and the resulting file will use more bytes. james@linux:~> cat > test_tar Test File james@linux:~> ls -l test_tar -rw-r--r-- 1 james users 10 2006-03-02 23:41 test_tar james@linux:~> tar -cf testit.tar test_tar james@linux:~> ls -l testit.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 james users 10240 2006-03-02 23:42 testit.tar - James W.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Thursday 2006-03-02 at 23:43 -0500, James Wright wrote:
Yes, untaring an archive can result in smaller bytes. tar a simple text/ascii file and the resulting file will use more bytes.
Right. I had forgotten that "freedb" has a huge number of files, and each one has to be listed. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFECJkStTMYHG2NR9URAkq3AJ4h5ePrcWkPh/G8n2nKHbBi8IAAFwCfRouP auzHGsgdULRLf6ELPs7HfiM= =aErm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
But I would simply switch to reiserfs. You said:
As the freedb database contains zillions of small files it
That's perfect for reiserfs. Ideal for you ;-)
At least, try, I'd like to know if the untarring runs faster on reiserfs under the same conditions - I'm very curious, it should be much faster ;-)
Hello: In the meantime I untarred the freedb database on the same system I originally mentioned. The untarring lasted 9.5 mins (reiserfs) vs. 20 hours (ext3). Cheers, IG _________________________________________________________________________ Könyvszerda - 30% kedvezmény - március 22-én, 0-24 óráig a Bookline-nál http://www.bookline.hu/control/news?newsid=397&affiliate=frekszkar2088
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2006-03-14 at 18:03 +0100, Istvan Gabor wrote:
Hello:
In the meantime I untarred the freedb database on the same system I originally mentioned. The untarring lasted 9.5 mins (reiserfs) vs. 20 hours (ext3).
Uau. That's some difference. By the way, what's the site of freedb? I had a quick search but didn't find it. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFEF1whtTMYHG2NR9URAhFSAJwI+8AJEiOC0tPlmw4Z7E58zZNOxgCePKnY MZwBK6KhU/tVEAJCBpU/d+k= =mZsP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (3)
-
Carlos E. R.
-
Istvan Gabor
-
James Wright