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 1NmniW-0002rq-U7 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:30:21 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B8C7FE0E80; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:30:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.digimed.co.uk (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77B59E0E80 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:30:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from digimed.co.uk (grunthos.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE0E06DC69C for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:30:07 +0000 (GMT) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:30:06 +0000 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Advice/best practices for a new Gentoo installation Message-ID: <20100303123006.205ee841@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <201003031253.02814.wonko@wonkology.org> References: <58965d8a1002260954v37bc6293xd4b92d82183bd346@mail.gmail.com> <201003021035.43235.wonko@wonkology.org> <20100302101031.13ee93c9@digimed.co.uk> <201003031253.02814.wonko@wonkology.org> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5cvs31 (GTK+ 2.18.7; i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/h7N3bozMD372qqCQ1Khz5HC"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 1ade35a4-7c27-4de3-8663-128f63a76adc X-Archives-Hash: b547b5cfab8013e4bc2f7ba47515e6ed --Sig_/h7N3bozMD372qqCQ1Khz5HC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:52:55 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote: > > The data I've seen indicates that ext2 is fastest, that's what I > > use. =20 >=20 > I thought the small files of the portage tree especially profit from > the notail option in reiserfs? They benefit compared with using reiser with tail-packing. > Did you change the block size? I had to change both the block size and blocks per inode, otherwise I would run out of inodes on a 1GB filesystem. You have to admire the user-friendliness of ext! > > There's no need for journalling on the portage tree, it's small enough > > to fsck quickly and if it does get broken, reformat and resync. =20 >=20 > Would the journaling overhead be noticeable?=20 > I also had used ext2 for my portage tree first, then I read somewhere > that reiserfs would be the best. BTW, I have distfiles and pkgdir > somewhere else, if not the fsck would not be so fast. It's certainly noticeable compared with ext3. Many benchmarks do show ext2 to be the fastest filesystem, probably because of the lack of journalling overhead. Like you, I have $DISTDIR and $PKGDIR elsewhere, those files really should not be mixed in with the portage tree. > Just for fun, I just copied my $PORTDIR into my tmpfs, emerge -DpN > @system @world takes between 81 and 53 seconds. With reiserfs, I get > 130 seconds first ($PORTDIR was unmounted first and mounted again to > clear the caches), and 57 seconds in the second attempt. >=20 > I had expected that tmpfs would be even faster. I think I just keep it > the way it is now. The exact same thought occurred to me. With a local tree to sync from, tmpfs seemed a good choice (you could sync it from /etc/conf.d/local) but it seems like it is not worth bothering with. I'll try a reiser3 filesystem without tail packing to see if it beats ext2. --=20 Neil Bothwick Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't. --Sig_/h7N3bozMD372qqCQ1Khz5HC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuOVk4ACgkQum4al0N1GQN42gCfafqxnCB5VJhLOu+7OwyiPsTX qSoAoIXGinel7Ec39/H5HNRUbEloJazq =ucpP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/h7N3bozMD372qqCQ1Khz5HC--