On Saturday 07 February 2004 15:11, Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 02:17:35PM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 01:57:11PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > > <<On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:44:58 +0100 (CET), =?iso-8859-1?q?Claus=20Guttesen?= <cguttesen_at_yahoo.dk> said: > > > > Does the algorithm(s) rely only on percentage of free > > > > space? On a five TB (netto) filesystem eigth percent > > > > is approx. 410 GB which seems quite alot. > > > > > > A good Data Structures text will prove to you that the efficiency of > > > hashing algorithms of the sort that the UFS block allocator uses > > > depends only on the occupancy ratio and not on the absolute number of > > > free hash slots. > > > > Which translates into what wrt this question? That the 8% of free space > > is really necessary for the UFS block allocator to function efficiently? > > Yes, that is exactly what it translates to. Hm, I don't really understand why, but anyway, what performance degradation do I have to expect when lowering it to 2%? -Harry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:42 UTC