> > For example making reserved blocks count to > > 2048 for root (just to be sure...) > > 0 for /usr (users don't write there anyway) > > n for /var (depends, should be probably asked) > > 0 for /home (well, this IS user's space, isn't it?) > > That's an really bad idea actually, reserved blocks are very very handy > to have on all partitions, and without them things will slow down a > lot of the disk fills up. Hmm, didn't think of that: you mean it helps fragmenting? I have many disks which are full to 99% and I haven't noticed any slowness, but maybe it's because these disks are usually for read-only storage and dont fragment too much. Maybe I should try it with news-spool to see how it works. I always thought reserved blocks were for root to have space where he can fix things in a full filesystem and to prevent users to fill a partition like /var with garbage to prevent logging e.a. (but logs should not go to a user writable partition anyway if they are valuable...) Anyway, 5% of a 20GB partition is 1GB and as a default it's too much to waste. The problem here is that most people don't even know that you can tune reserved block count and efficiently waste disk space. 0 for home is maybe too little, but if average file size is less than 1MB you really don't need 1GB worth of reserved blocks. Zeroing block count seems to be bad idea in every case, but at least we could think about making it smaller. Maybe. -- Ilkka Tuohela, Nixu Oy Tel +358 9 478 1057 | Mobile +358 40 5233174 E-mail hile@nixu.fi | Homepage http://www.nixu.fi/~hile/
Attachment:
pgpU1atGs_SRZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature