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 1MY5Rt-00079c-KX for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:52:06 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AD767E039F; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 21:51:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (ey-out-1920.google.com [74.125.78.149]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74839E03D4 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 21:51:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 5so905355eyb.10 for ; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 14:51:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=tjc365R7AuLA+yZqNdFp2WWA1vM2zZCR4bRYDWGUnng=; b=xEC9xtjWM5mf+N8yW7Kslb7i7mnlDxqkIJqY2V5CBcmtrpoqGDaerLU1a9ehtedd+h pKXPDNO53s15MniKA34XsWfhVXNXGzj43hLFYMuybNZLzoqBrfzlwkPb2dvhwuQWk45K 9PGH/MHMSvvjgbpGlRv7Bvv4C1UN7JTgpV8g0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :message-id; b=KL3J9uL3y4V3mOeN56BACbMGyDLtJ0VeaqDCRDCgD+gAQVCsseBPppb0ibbaAgxQvN Hxs/8IMRCCrJZgoh7rPfqnFupihyKAWzNc7NqeaVFGRdQx2vGJsug1N6IQEQPS1yChuz dX/xYMDmQJcvR0QMxhQa93SQz3/dy6Q+Rwt0o= Received: by 10.210.79.3 with SMTP id c3mr5739293ebb.16.1249336301963; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 14:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet ([196.210.202.145]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 5sm371356eyh.26.2009.08.03.14.51.40 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 03 Aug 2009 14:51:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Anybody tried shake defragmenter? Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 23:50:16 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.4 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r4; KDE/4.2.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <49bf44f10908031322y2b06b5ffx76ecb27092b9edfa@mail.gmail.com> <200908032311.50608.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: 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 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200908032350.16720.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 3cb823d7-b447-4fc3-84b2-103bbbfb59c0 X-Archives-Hash: 95200fe6d58202f3011e060d952d6114 On Monday 03 August 2009 23:16:05 Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2009-08-03, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Monday 03 August 2009 23:05:02 Paul Hartman wrote: > >> The time-honored way of fixing this is "backup, delete, > >> restore". In my case my simple defragmenter is to move a file > >> to tmpfs and then move it back to the hard drive. I always do > >> this to files I'm about to burn to a CD/DVD to ensure the read > >> speed is optimal. > > > > Until one day someone write a super-duper disk cache algorithm > > that delays writes safely, notices that you are putting back > > unmodified something you just deleted, then reverts "to be > > deleted" flag on the block pointers. meaning that nothing has > > changed. > > > > Lucky for us, I do not believe that such a driver has been > > written yet. Unlucky for us, I believe that such a driver is > > entirely possible. > > And actually quite simple once the > content-addressable-disk-drive is invented. We tried that already, it was called WinFS. Unfortunately, it was an idea ahead of it's time and technology was not quite ready for it yet :-) -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com