From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LoFh8-0007fG-L3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:30:22 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8FF24E0574; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lnldap3.comunired.com (unknown [217.130.24.217]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B8EDE058A for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 12465 invoked by uid 7007); 30 Mar 2009 11:30:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.201]) (IX1V7746758@iservicesmail.com@[89.7.232.84]) (envelope-sender ) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 30 Mar 2009 11:30:16 -0000 Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] Recommendation about faster (not smaller) filesystem and blocksize combination for portage tree From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain Organization: pacho@condmat1.ciencias.uniovi.es Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:30:18 +0200 Message-Id: <1238412618.18113.15.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 02b4cf37-245b-4a62-ab7e-4d919008ac70 X-Archives-Hash: b6b86d86dc037f99d069dc0417da1986 Hello I am trying to know what filesystem+blocksize combination could be better for the kind of files stored in portage tree. In the past, I have been using reiserfs for my / partition and I had /usr/portage under it. Later, I moved /usr/portage to a different partition (distfiles go to a different directory) and switched it to ext2 (as, in theory, ext2 should be faster as has no journaling) and 2048 as blocksize (that, of course, shrinks portage tree sizes but I am unsure about its effects from a performance point of view) Of course, I am not asking you for benchmarks or something else, I am simply asking for your opinions about what would be better combination from a performance point of view of filesystem+blocksize (or, at least, what blocksize would be better for speed, I can test filesystems later based on it) Thanks a lot for your recommendations :-)