From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 19:44:23 -0500 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <8cf1be637c136fea77c25a1b6df9f24a@chula.quanstro.net> In-Reply-To: <20120110024048.GA407@polynum.com> References: <20120110024048.GA407@polynum.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] fossil (again) Topicbox-Message-UUID: 574a831e-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > Side note: are there statics about the Plan9 distribution, to know what > is the best size of blocks? It seems that there is a lot of small text > files, so 8kb is perhaps too much. i did these calculations for the files in / on my worm. i used values from ken's file server for a variety of block sizes. the program is careful to count all the indirect blocks as well, but for simplicity i ignore directories rather than working hard to guess how much storage they're using. (can be wrong if entries are deleted.) i think these numbers will be similar to those of fossil. blksize files blocks mb used 16384 35738 1427263 22300 8192 35738 2675543 20902 4096 35738 7775796 30374 obviously, there are two competing forces at work here. the amount of space wasted off the tail of the last block, and the amount of blocks required to map the data into the inode completely. it seems that for my mix of files, 8k is a winner. - erik