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 1MZHBl-0001j4-8q for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 04:36:21 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ADD1CE01F9; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:36:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpout.karoo.kcom.com (smtpout.karoo.kcom.com [212.50.160.34]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71E2CE01F9 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:36:19 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.43,337,1246834800"; d="scan'208";a="117276284" Received: from unknown (HELO compaq.stroller.uk.eu.org) ([213.152.39.90]) by smtpout.karoo.kcom.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2009 05:36:18 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.71] (unknown [192.168.1.71]) by compaq.stroller.uk.eu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AB60137D4B for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 05:36:17 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <09249FFC-9C62-45EB-8779-F153720A34A1@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> From: Stroller To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20090807095656.765dfbb6@malediction> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Anybody tried shake defragmenter? Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 05:36:14 +0100 References: <49bf44f10908031322y2b06b5ffx76ecb27092b9edfa@mail.gmail.com> <58965d8a0908031405g1cf04cbarc77d588072fdbe89@mail.gmail.com> <49bf44f10908031648g65d405b0i78beead0ea0b8ab9@mail.gmail.com> <58965d8a0908031801xcfd2a8ex433705ed93cf589c@mail.gmail.com> <49bf44f10908041126h3e991956ta3a3fd397778ff4f@mail.gmail.com> <20090807095656.765dfbb6@malediction> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-Archives-Salt: df1875f7-d482-412e-99c0-7547dc1baef4 X-Archives-Hash: e0d8438dbe0b72eee5403410f5f13ca5 On 7 Aug 2009, at 04:56, Mike Kazantsev wrote: > ... > Note that this problem can also be (easily?) solved on software > level by > pre-allocating files (like "dd if=/dev/zero of=file"). > > Sure, that won't make writes sequential, but that should guarantee > that > resulting file would be as non-fragmented as fs allows at a time of > it's creation. > > In fact, rtorrent (and libtorrent) seem to have such a feature, > prehaps > other clients should have it somewhere, as well. > > http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no/ticket/460 I think this went out of fashion after BitTorrent clients became clever / advanced enough to download single files. I'm old enough to remember the days when opening a torrent would download the only the whole thing. If the torrent contained several files (mp3s, for instance), of which you wanted only one, then tough luck - the client would download random chunks of all the files until it had 100% of all of them, and the chances were that the one single file you wanted would be incomplete until the whole torrent was at least 99% finished (and there was no easy way to tell, anyway; you just had to download the whole lot). Once BitTorrent clients added the feature to select individual files for download out of the "compilation", this became quite a popular use of them amongst the general public (who are not, as a rule, downloading Linux CDs) and led to complaints about all the space being "wasted" by preallocation in this way. I gather that many BitTorrent users may be interested in only 5% of a typical complete torrent. I don't use BitTorrent as actively as I used to, but my recollection is that NOT pre-allocating the space was a "feature" that was ADDED to the more sophisticated clients. Ideally it should indeed be an option, but it may not be ubiquitous. Stroller.