Disk defragmenter in Linux

[Mike McCarty]

Jim Cornette wrote:
> Mike McCarty wrote:


[snip]

>>>> Surely those who argue that ext3 does not get fragmented
>>>> during install don't think that 248 extents is "not
>>>> significant fragmentation".
>>>>
>>>> I assure you that I have done nothing on my system to try to
>>>> fragment emacs.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The fragmentation for your emacs is unbelievably high. I did not find 
>>> anything yet fragmented in the hundreds, let alone several hundred 
>>> extents. Are you using LVM? My system is setup in traditional 
>>> partitions. LVM usage "seemed" slower in responsiveness, so I assumed 
>>> it was more in fragments
>>
>>
>>
>> Why "unvelievably"? Do you mean that you do not believe what my
>> system says? Or that you do not believe my e-mail? Or that you
>> find that it stretches your imagination? Or what?
>>
>> To answer your question, I use FC2.
>>
>> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> Unbelievable simply refers to this fragmentation number sounds like it 

Well, then I agree with you. This seems extreme.

> should not happen. I have no doubt that you are seeing this on your 
> system. Since you are running FC2, I assume the system is using regular 
> partitions and that the system has been in operation for a long time. 
> Sorry if  the response sounded otherwise.

It was installed in late October 2004. Although, as one pointed
out, multiple extents does not *necessarily* imply fragmentation,
it is extremely suggestive, and indicates that fragmentation is
*likely*.

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!