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 <gentoo-user+bounces-136147-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1S71Hn-0005g8-6J
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:11:23 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B530EE0B94;
Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:11:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from emailteste.ufop.br (emailteste.ufop.br [200.131.208.186])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82365E0B81
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:09:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 11963 invoked by uid 89); 12 Mar 2012 09:00:01 -0000
Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 11901, pid: 11960, t: 0.0151s
scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.91.2/m:54/d:13922
Received: from unknown (HELO malaquias.no-ip.org) (romildo@iceb.ufop.br@200.239.138.75)
by 0 with ESMTPA; 12 Mar 2012 09:00:01 -0000
Received: by malaquias.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 500)
id 5F3E010A0C9; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 06:15:24 -0300 (BRT)
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 06:15:24 -0300
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9?= Romildo Malaquias <j.romildo@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Best file system for portage tree?
Message-ID: <20120312091524.GB27991@malaquias.DHCP-GERAL>
References: <20120310143015.6d507af3@weird.wonkology.org>
<20120310153505.54bfd38e@digimed.co.uk>
<20120310183606.GA13466@ksp.sk>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
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: <20120310183606.GA13466@ksp.sk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Archives-Salt: c7cea5b6-25b3-4a78-9827-b0f485259bc5
X-Archives-Hash: 44a0d688b87d5f9d1919b1fc15726694
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 07:36:07PM +0100, YoYo Siska wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 03:35:05PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:30:15 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
> >
> > > Any tips on this? Does it make sense to use a special file system just
> > > for the portage tree? What would be best? Would it help to re-create
> > > this file system from time to time in case it gets slower with every
> > > sync?
> >
> > I use an ext2 filesystem for portage, it's still the fastest out there.
> > Journals are unnecessary because its such a small filesystem, and if it
> > does get damaged I can just reformat and sync again.
>
> I use an ext2 partition in a 500MB file image on most of my computers.
> Its important to check the inode count on such small filesytem, as
> mke2fs' default inode ration for such size is 4096, which is too
> low for portage:
>
> dd bs=$((500*1024*1024)) count=1 if=/dev/zero of=/usr/img_portage
> mke2fs -f -b1024 -i2048 /usr/img_portage
The -f option from mke2fs is to specify a fragment size and expects an
argument. Do you -F (which forces mke2fs to create a filesystem, even if
the specified device is not a partittion on a block special device)?
> fstab:
> /usr/img_portage /usr/portage/ ext2 loop,noatime 0 0
> (this is from desktop, on servers I usually only mount it manually when
> emerging)
>
> # df -h
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/loop0 469M 306M 139M 69% /usr/portage
>
> # df -i
> Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on
> /dev/loop0 256032 152044 103988 60% /usr/portage
Romildo