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 1MZFCi-0001LU-SI for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:29:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A6B90E08B2; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 02:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 33404E08B2 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 02:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Aug 2009 02:29:09 -0000 Received: from p54852261.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO gmx.net) [84.133.34.97] by mail.gmx.net (mp052) with SMTP; 07 Aug 2009 04:29:09 +0200 X-Authenticated: #20088476 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19UVcAmmOtUlQtd+GAJB9OizmIJgOOrrY3O53xNKz JJ69tR9SihBaqy Received: by gmx.net (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1001 Meino.Cramer@gmx.de; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:29:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:29:09 +0200 From: meino.cramer@gmx.de To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Anybody tried shake defragmenter? Message-ID: <20090807022909.GA2220@solfire> References: <49bf44f10908031322y2b06b5ffx76ecb27092b9edfa@mail.gmail.com> <58965d8a0908031405g1cf04cbarc77d588072fdbe89@mail.gmail.com> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <58965d8a0908031405g1cf04cbarc77d588072fdbe89@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (Linux) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.64 X-Archives-Salt: d4ed5e33-33b3-43c8-8465-d3f843d59d90 X-Archives-Hash: 50878983f590cb62a4343ccc16bf3329 Paul Hartman [09-08-03 23:09]: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Grant wrote: > > I know Linux systems aren't supposed to become fragmented, but I've > > also read that it can happen eventually. I'm on ext3. I've read that > > ext4 will have a defragmenter but that it doesn't have one yet. > > It's not that they aren't supposed to become fragmented, it is that > they try to avoid it. There is a big difference, and things like > streaming writes (downloads, bittorrents, etc) can cause extreme > fragmentation. > > 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. > > > Has anyone tried the shake defragmenter? > > Yes, nothing has blown up yet. :) Hi, I have several encfs-encrypted partions. As fas as I had understood encfs, only the contents of the data file and not their organisational data are encrypted (?). But I may be wrong... So, do I any harm to shake those partions without mounting them in beforehand? Kind regards, Meino Cramer PS: How can I make a mount -o remount,user_xattr work? Do I have to re-mkfs the partions (please not..) ? -- Please don't send me any Word- or Powerpoint-Attachments unless it's absolutely neccessary. - Send simply Text. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html In a world without fences and walls nobody needs gates and windows.