Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <010501c31ef2$52011f30$78d96f83@pomello>
From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb AT ukf DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <16072 DOT 892 DOT 778395 DOT 24290 AT gargle DOT gargle DOT HOWL> <009001c31d93$b61d08e0$78d96f83 AT pomello> <badjvi$43a$1 AT main DOT gmane DOT org>
Subject: Re: SPARSE files considered harmful - please revert
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 18:07:29 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165

Rolf Campbell wrote:
> Max Bowsher wrote:
>
>> Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>>> As a result, a non-empty but small sparse file takes up a minimum of
>>> 16*clustersize bytes on the disk.  My measurements suggest an overhead
>>> of 32kb per file with a cluster size of 4kb.
>>
>>
>> I just thought I'd throw a few more numbers into the debate:
>>
>> I patched Cygwin to respond to CYGWIN=sparse / CYGWIN=nosparse
>> Then, I did a cvs co winsup:
>>
>> "Size on disc" of checked out dir, as shown in Windows properties box:
>> Sparse: 40.7MB
>> Not sparse: 43.6MB
>> OK, so sparse seems to win? But that makes no sense - backed up by noting
>> that for various individual sparse files, "Size on disc" is reporting a
size
>> which is not an integer number of clusters.
>>
>> Now, Properties of disc, look at "Used space":
>> Difference in creating sparse checkout: ~ 200MB !!!
>> Difference in creating normal checkout: ~  40MB
>>
>> Personally, I'm inclined to trust the overall disc stats more.
>>
>> I think this evidence suggests that sparse files should NOT be on by
default
>> in Cygwin.
>
> I just checked out a corporate build system, which had average file size
> much bigger.  It decreases the available disk space by 300Megs with
> non-sparce files, and 390Megs with sparce files.

Well, that's still 90MB unneccessary disk usage. Horribly inelegant, even if
not directly inconveniencing.


Max.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/