On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 03:55:45PM -0500, Michael Janssen wrote: > > >Actually, BitTorrent does have alot to do with it. While BitTorrent >allocates the whole file at startup, it is very much a sparse file, >and the ext2 filesystem (and other filesystems) pick up on that and >don't allocate the whole space. When BitTorrent downloads pieces >randomly, the filesystem, seeing that it is still a sparse file, >starts writing the pieces at the front. > >The newer BitTorrent - from CVS - has a new allocation technique and >should not exhibit this behavior. Hopefully we will release a new >version soon (soon being in August sometime) Did you say we? I take it you are involved in the developement process. Good work! I am glad to hear we have a local lugger in the bittorrent loop. So this is obviously a known issue then, with the file fragmentation. Have you seen any or used any technics for solving the problem? I am leaning towards the file copy solution at the moment. I will probably "purchase/borrow" an HDD from a local corporate store and cp the files and then investigate the woes of the original drive. > -- Linux Administrator || Technology Specialist || Wifi Engineer http://autonomous.tv/~spencer/resume/ || spencer at autonomous.tv Key fingerprint = 173B 8760 E59F DBF8 6FD2 68F8 ABA2 AB08 49C7 4754 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20030719/034071ca/attachment.pgp