From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1IBw1r-0005eT-3u for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:12:35 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6KHAfTo010832; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:10:41 GMT Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6KHAdXY010827 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:10:40 GMT Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id d32so2096677pye for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=s2CGLf7mnE7dPAxD98houUCLN/goEbaj1GCuhjIgFw29slrWx4C9llkwylJsKi41ingdvhkcQp9J9Vlm09VZwhoYMw6QlSv6w5lwZM4bkua6EQtnx8MNKoWRInJAyn27iljf7drE6Pd1YplTjxCKoKRn98C9P99gzcSFz2YpqIg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=Bn/DkYEmourk1xD1XxyWVuvaVDe4d2YsfzehN6TOR1mUWmFaRjqOtM6YpJ1imdpaC+31BvhmjQJjDhe6reker4nZXtXSlX/RIdqYcXTMiB+DRhEbak+Z9iU8E5ghnE3koQ1X1Xi8cFhzmZKDi+BHrXOZK5V0jqhB/m9Qkqf9C9c= Received: by 10.35.82.16 with SMTP id j16mr1117386pyl.1184951439043; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.84.10 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 10:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 19:10:39 +0200 From: Beso To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] 2nd HDD for var, tmp, usr/portage, swap In-Reply-To: <20070720151306.GD407376@sgi.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_76274_28061442.1184951439001" References: <200707201641.30655.e0026053@student.tuwien.ac.at> <20070720151306.GD407376@sgi.com> X-Archives-Salt: 6eefecba-040a-4870-a8fb-d3817ed996db X-Archives-Hash: 617e76e76e703dae088fc649fe3b2bda ------=_Part_76274_28061442.1184951439001 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline the only thing that i've splitted is: /boot on a 100Mb partition, and this thing has saved me a lot of pain when something went wrong with the reiserfschecks when the pc ran out of energy with ext2 unjournaled, the /home partition, so that it could be used with different systems without reconfiguring with reiserfs, and a large file partition with xfs which has a very great large file usage.... i personally don't really think that splitting other / subfolders may have a great use on everyday use.... 2007/7/20, Bob Sanders : > > Bernhard Auzinger, mused, then expounded: > > Hi, > > > > as I have four hdd's in my computer, I was wondering if it does make > sense to > > source out some partitions/directories to a second hdd. > > > > There is no simple answer. It really depends upon a lot of factors - > controllers, > drives, file system, memory, system bus... > > > At the moment I have separate partitions for /var, /tmp and /usr/portage > (I > > feel portage is a lot faster since I've done this) on the same hdd. > > > > My question is if it makes sence to move these partitions to another > harddisk? > > > > Spreading them across drives could result in faster access if the > controllers > the drives are atached to allow overlapping commands. IDE doesn't do this > and > can only have one drive active on the bus. > > Also, some things - /var/tmp/portage, need fast read/write access while > /usr/portage > is a large number of small files (things like Open Office, gcc, firefox > being > exceptions) and mainly read only access. In many cases /tmp is mainly an > initial > write, then mostly read only access once the file get built. > > Also, it depends on where on the drive the partition resides. Swap is > usually best > around one third to one half into the drive if the drive is 60% or more > full. Less > access time as the head idles arounf the swap area. > > And as drives fill up, they will slow down as file seek times > increase. Additionally, > different file systems will respond to the types of files differently - > lots of > small files, large streaming media files, indexed databases, all require > considering > the intended use. > > In desktop use, I've watched the typical file i/o and can say it tended to > stay > below 4 or 5 MB/s peak for most things. And I've seen raid 5 rebuilds > sustain > 225 MB/s on the same system. > > So, sure move the r/w tasks off disks competing with other r/w tasks and > leave the > read only tasks on the man system disk. You'll see a small improvement, > but in the > larger scheme of things, outside of uncompressing the kernel, open office, > firefox, > or gcc, it won't matter much more than 1% or 2% improvement. > > Bob > - > -- > gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list > > -- beso d-_-b ------=_Part_76274_28061442.1184951439001 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline the only thing that i've splitted is:
/boot on a 100Mb partition, and this thing has saved me a lot of pain when something went wrong with the reiserfschecks when the pc ran out of energy with ext2 unjournaled,
the /home partition, so that it could be used with different systems without reconfiguring with reiserfs,
and a large file partition with xfs which has a very great large file usage....
i personally don't really think that splitting other / subfolders may have a great use on everyday use....

2007/7/20, Bob Sanders <rsanders@sgi.com>:
Bernhard Auzinger, mused, then expounded:
> Hi,
>
> as I have four hdd's in my computer, I was wondering if it does make sense to
> source out some partitions/directories to a second hdd.
>

There is no simple answer.  It really depends upon a lot of factors - controllers,
drives, file system, memory, system bus...

> At the moment I have separate partitions for /var, /tmp and /usr/portage (I
> feel portage is a lot faster since I've done this) on the same hdd.
>
> My question is if it makes sence to move these partitions to another harddisk?
>

Spreading them across drives could result in faster access if the controllers
the drives are atached to allow overlapping commands.  IDE doesn't do this and
can only have one drive active on the bus.

Also, some things - /var/tmp/portage, need fast read/write access while /usr/portage
is a large number of small files  (things like Open Office, gcc, firefox being
exceptions) and mainly read only access.  In many cases /tmp is mainly an initial
write, then mostly read only access once the file get built.

Also, it depends on where on the drive the partition resides.  Swap is usually best
around one third to one half into the drive if the drive is 60% or more full.  Less
access time as the head idles arounf the swap area.

And as drives fill up, they will slow down as file seek times increase.  Additionally,
different file systems will respond to the types of files differently - lots of
small files, large streaming media files, indexed databases, all require considering
the intended use.

In desktop use, I've watched the typical file i/o and can say it tended to stay
below 4 or 5 MB/s peak for most things.  And I've seen raid 5 rebuilds sustain
225 MB/s on the same system.

So, sure move the r/w tasks off disks competing with other r/w tasks and leave the
read only tasks on the man system disk.  You'll see a small improvement, but in the
larger scheme of things, outside of uncompressing the kernel, open office, firefox,
or gcc, it won't matter much more than 1% or 2% improvement.

Bob
-
--
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list




--
beso

d-_-b ------=_Part_76274_28061442.1184951439001-- -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list