Aaron Konstam wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 13:18 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
>> Different file systems are optimized for different things. Some of
>> them,
>> for example, do better at holding large sparse files. So, "efficiency"
>> has several possible interpretations.
>>
>>
> That may be true but that has nothing to do with having the sub-file
> trees of / in different partitions. If you want that kind of efficiency
> just have you whole / partition optimized for sparse files.
Yes, it does, b/c optimizing for one kind of efficiency normally
reduces other kinds. So, a FS optimized for sparse files may not
be optimized in another way desirable for other sub-trees.
That was the point of what I wrote. What is the best file system
for /usr/bin may not be the same as that for /bin, b/c /usr/bin
might be expected to contain large(ish) data files, while
/bin should only contain relatively small binaries.
In any case, the fact that one person doesn't feel a need for
a certain kind of flexibility shouldn't be an argument for
eliminating it altogether, w/o consulting with those who might
feel a need for it.
At present, it isn't an issue for me anyway, since I use the
same sorts of FS for all my partitions. That doesn't mean that
I'm insensitive to the needs of others.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
