On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 08:29:50AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote: <snip> > You'll lose one advantage of reiserfs: the saving on not having indirect > and indirect blocks with large files, as that still has to be performed > by the underlying filesystem. So don't be surprised if that doesn't > perform as well as you'd expect.
The main reason is having faster directory lookups. wwwoffle's spools dirs get quite big. If we want to access an specific directory, an ext2fs has still walk through all directory entries, while reiserfs simply does an fast hash lookup. (if I understood it right) <snip> > > For writing into an file, mkfs.reiserfs says it wants the -f option, > > but the manpage says, with this option it writes to the whole disk. > > In my manpage, it says that -f forces mkreiserfs to continue even if the > device is either a whole disk, OR is not a block device, or looks > mounted. hmm, seems we have different manpages ... > > So what is really meant ? Can I safely use it ? > > If you use it as a non-root user, it's perfectly safe whatever it tries > to do... yeah, thats the simpliest way :) cu -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt == metux IT services phone: +49 36207 519931 www: http://www.metux.de/ fax: +49 36207 519932 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cellphone: +49 174 7066481 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Diese Mail wurde mit UUCP versandt. http://www.metux.de/uucp/
