[ltp] Slackware on T42?

[joshua timberman]

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:34:53 -0500, morpheus <morpheus@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
> Reiser is supposedly much more efficient if you have large numbers of
> very small files (if you're running an IMAP or USENET server, for
> example).  It combines small files and stores them in the same block,
> rather than storing files only in multiples of one block.  So, if your
> block size is 4K on ext3 if you have four 1K files, it uses 16K on the
> disk, but on Reiser it uses only 4K...at least in theory, I've never
> used Reiser.

It is vastly more efficient for lots of small files.  See also my
qmail reference in another post on this thread.

I recall for ReiserFS, 4k block sizes for all aspects of the
filesystem should be used - filesystem and LVM or RAID where
applicable.

> Since I don't store lots of small files, and since I was already on ext2
> (and you can't convert between ext and Reiser), I went with ext3.  If
> you're already on Reiser, I'd stay there.
> 
> Any experts on Reiser out there care to comment?

I'm not a ReiserFS expert, but I am a Linux expert :).  I've made some
comments on this thread about ReiserFS already...  I haven't tried to
convert from ext2/3 to ReiserFS but I've heard it can be done w/o data
loss?  Maybe.  Of course, there's always the
wipe-clean-and-reformat-new method, which is always possible but of
course data goes away.

-- 
prepare for down count.. 5.. 4.. 3.. 1.. off blast!