> I'd be interested to know if anyone can come up with a reason for the
> difference of the two values though. Intuition suggests to
> me that they
> should be the same, but what I copied above suggests otherwise.
It's easy. Files are stored on disc in logical units called clusters. I'm
not sure what's EXT2 cluster size (i'm still more familiar with FAT/NTFS,
don't beat me for that ;-)) but let's presume 512 Bytes.
Then every file, even 1 byte long takes 512 bytes and so on with multiples.
If you take average object size (let's say 8kB) and compare it to cluster
size you can see the differrence (called "slack" is 512/8192=6,25%).
And that's it.
On the other side, you must keep record of where files reside on disc (for
every single cluster of each file). And the lower cluster size the more
space you need for this record. So the usual compromise is somewhere between
512B meaning you need CapacityOfPartition/ClusterSize/8 to create bitmap of
full drive.
MP
Received on Fri Mar 24 2000 - 02:27:20 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:52:22 MST