Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964805AbWAIQS1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:18:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964838AbWAIQS0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:18:26 -0500 Received: from linux01.gwdg.de ([134.76.13.21]:39640 "EHLO linux01.gwdg.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964805AbWAIQS0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:18:26 -0500 Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 17:18:22 +0100 (MET) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Lee Revell cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: reiserfs mount time In-Reply-To: <1136763077.2997.4.camel@mindpipe> Message-ID: References: <1136763077.2997.4.camel@mindpipe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1055 Lines: 27 >> >> brought to attentino on an irc channel, reiser seems to have the largest >> mount times for big partitions. I see this behavior on at least two >> machines (160G, 250G) and one specially-crafted virtual machine >> (a 1.9TB disk / 1.9TB partition - took somewhere over 120 seconds). >> Here's a dig http://linuxgazette.net/122/misc/piszcz/group001/image002.png >> from http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszcz >> So, any hint from the reiserfs developers how come reiserfs takes so long? >> Standard mkreiserfs options (none extra passed). > >reiser3 or reiser4? For my case, reiser3. (According to that pic link (from irc) also reiser4, but I'm inclined not to believe that one.) Jan Engelhardt -- | Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/ | jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/