Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.adelphia.com!news.adelphia.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:32:01 -0500
Newsgroups: fidonet.linux
From: CHARLES_ANGELICH@f140.n123.z1
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:47:00 -0400
Subject: defrag
Message-ID: 
Organization: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG
 456
 205/1
 267/200
Lines: 39
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.48.121.215
 properly
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com fidonet.linux:292


123c7e4b0a17
linux



Hello Scott - 

DD>> The files themselves do NOT fragment 

SL> Nonsense. Have you ever even checked? 

Thank you. That seems to be the problem, no one checks. They
were told linux doesn't fragment and never thought to check for
themselves. 

SL> If you're running JAM/squish bases (files that grow and
SL> shrink a frequently) you'll probably find them quite
SL> fragmented. Large disc images tend to fragment too, IME. 

It has also been mentioned that as a hard drive becomes filled
the fragmentation increases much faster. 

SL> Go download (e2)defrag mentioned in another post and have a
SL> look.  Last time I used it (I use XFS now), it included the
SL> "frag" tool that just reports fragmentation without
SL> changing anything. If you don't have good backups, I would
SL> advise against using poorly/infrequently maintained
SL> low-level filesystem mangulation widgets... 

Defrag'g a drive can be hazardous.

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__