[NTLUG:Discuss] ext3 waste disk spaces then Windows ME?

[Terry]

On 4/25/06, Pat Regan <thehead at patshead.com> wrote:
> m m wrote:
> > All:
> >
> > I just found this:
> >
> > " ... Ext3 has the worst inital capacity (92.77%), while others FS preserve
> > almost full partition capacity (ReiserFS = 99.83%, JFS = 99.82%, XFS =
> > 99.95%). Interestingly, the residual capacity of Ext3 and ReiserFS was
> > identical to the initial, while JFS and XFS lost about 0.02% of their
> > partition capacity, suggesting that these FS can dynamically grow but do not
> > completely return to their inital state (and size) after file removal."
> >
> > from
> >
> > http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/6396
> >
> > According to the article abovem it seems that the XFS is "better" than ext3.
> > ext3 must be good at some points, otherwise why the most distro use it?
> > Anyone have the idea?
> >
>
> Somebody needs to tell the author of that article about the fact that
> mke2fs reserves 5% of the filesystem for root by default.  That would
> bring your number for ext2 up to almost 98%.

What do you mean "mke2fs reserves 5% of the filesystem for root"
(The "for root"  part is what I don't understand.)
The only two concepts of root  I know of are the root file system and
the root directory ( / & /root ), but I know you aren't talking about
either of those, right?

>
> 5% was a very reasonable amount of space to set aside 10+ year ago.
> Today, it can be a huge waste of space.
>
> Pat
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://ntlug.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>


--
<><