Re: Waste of storage space? [follow-up]

1 nov 2008 kl. 16.27 skrev Michelle Konzack:

Hello Frank, Do you use Linux or Windows?

Initially, the system I am working on will be installed under Mac OS X Server.

If Windows you have already lost since the cluster size of e.g. Windows 2003 is 32 kByte or 64 kByte... If Linux, you can setup the partitoin to use a blocksize of 1, 2, 4 or 8 kByte. I asume you are using Linux and "two or three sentences per text" can not realy large... even 2 kByte is already big for it. I have arround 140 million files on one of my storage server (38 TByte) with a size of some kBytes up to a half GByte and I have set the blocksize to 4 kByte... Calculating the wasted space give me arround 340 GByte... Reducing the blocksize to 2 kByte the wasted space is only 170 GBYte. But I give a f..k on it... Diskspace is cheap (even using 300 GByte SCSI drives) and I realy do not like to reinitialize 10 Raid-5 volumes (each 16 HDD) with 3900 GBytes of usable space

I agree, disk space is cheap. And to be honest, I am now convinced that storage space really isn't a serious issue. So, to sum up. Previously I was working with the idea to store both old and new values. But, thanks to what Bastien Koert suggested earlier, the history table now stores changes (=new text) only. I think that this is much more sleek to work with. Besides that, before recording something to the history table, I do some filtering on the new text which means that minor changes are walked over. Thank you all for sharing your ideas. //frank

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator 24V Electronic Engineer Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant