Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.adelphia.com!news.adelphia.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:08:30 -0500
Newsgroups: fidonet.linux
From: CHARLES_ANGELICH@f140.n123.z1
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:14:00 -0400
Subject: Re: defrag
Message-ID: 
Organization: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG
 456
 205/1
 267/200
Lines: 36
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.48.121.215
 properly
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com fidonet.linux:319


123c7e59a33e
linux



Hello Robert - 

SL>> Nonsense. Have you ever even checked? If you're running
SL>> JAM/squish bases (files that grow and shrink a frequently)
SL>> you'll probably find them quite fragmented. Large disc
SL>> images tend to fragment too, IME. Go download (e2)defrag
SL>> mentioned in another post and have a look. Last time I
SL>> used it (I use XFS now), it included the "frag" tool that
SL>> just reports fragmentation without changing anything. If
SL>> you don't have good  backups, I would advise against using
SL>> poorly/infrequently maintained low-level filesystem
SL>> mangulation widgets... 

RW> But I would like to know this ... do Linux (and other *NIX)
RW> filesystems ever need defragmenting? 

Logic tells me that the linux defrag utility would 

#1) never have been written if linux did not need it 

#2) development of the defrag utility would've stopped if it
wasn't being used by anyone. 

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