Quoting Joe Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> during boot up, I see my hard drive is 9.7 % non - contiguous. I'm not sure
> what this means.
> What then is the difference between non-contiguous and fragmentation? Is
> one worse than the other? How can my hard drive be 9.7 % non-contiguous if
> t
Also, if you happen to have a file larger than approx. 8MB (at least
with 2.0-compatible fs) it WILL be fragmented, because the inode tables
and block groups are laid out on the fs at 8MB intervals. Not sure what it
is on a fs made for the 2.2 kernel options.
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Peter S Galbrait
On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 11:00:56AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> "Joe Smith" wrote:
...
> > What then is the difference between non-contiguous and fragmentation?
...
"Non-contiguous" simply describes what the term "fragmentation" really
entails when you look at how a file is written onto a d
"Joe Smith" wrote:
> I know Linux uses the ext2 filesystem which is supposed to be
> anti-fragmenting.
It fragments when it has to (as opposed to `always' like
windows).
> during boot up, I see my hard drive is 9.7 % non - contiguous. I'm not sure
> what this means.
I assume that 9.7% of
Hello everyone,
This is a question I've had for a while.
I know Linux uses the ext2 filesystem which is supposed to be
anti-fragmenting. Once in a while, when I boot up, I get a message saying I
have reached maximal mount count and I have to sit and wait a few minutes
before I can continue w
5 matches
Mail list logo
