Re: non-contiguous vs Fragmentation
Quoting Joe Smith (jiggyman77@hotmail.com):
> 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
> the ext2 filesystem is supposed to be anti-fragmenting?
You can't maintain a perfectly unfragmented filesystem if files are
going to be modifiable are writing them. If you have to extend a
file that has another file written after it, then you've generated
a non-contiguous extent.
Even if users think they're smoothly writing two files that "ought"
to be contiguous, the time-sharing between processes will scupper
their efforts.
> Is there a way to make my hard drive contiguous again? I thought that there
> were no linux defragmenters.
There are such beasts, but they're probably rarely used as ext2 works
well. While all hell breaks loose if you actually run out of disk
space in, say, var or tmp, I've run at over 95% full disk space
with unpacked kernel sources and no effect on subsequent non-contig
figures..
9.7% non-contig is nothing to worry about.
Cheers,
--
Email: d.wright@open.ac.uk Tel: +44 1908 653 739 Fax: +44 1908 655 151
Snail: David Wright, Earth Science Dept., Milton Keynes, England, MK7 6AA
Disclaimer: These addresses are only for reaching me, and do not signify
official stationery. Views expressed here are either my own or plagiarised.
Reply to: