On Tue, 17 Dec 1996, Colin Wood wrote:

> > /: Optimization switching from SPACE to TIME
> > 
> I seem to remember something about this when the installer was posted 
> (something about how it installs faster now).  I don't think that it's 
> anything to be worried about (but I could obviously be wrong).  Either 
> way, a NetBSD install is not going to take up any more or less space no 
> matter how it's done.

I'm not positive about this, but I think it's referring to how much space
to leave.  NetBSD defaults to leaving 10% free and unusable (except by
root, of course), for use by the kernel during idle time for the purpose
of defragmenting the partition.  I suspect that's an optimization "time"
and that the optimization "space" is less than 10% (maybe 5, maybe 3,
maybe 0, dunno) of buffer room.

I could be wrong with that, but it seems like the most likely explanation.
And BTW, installer 1.0 does that if you set mkfs to optimize for space,
too.  I remember this from many a reinstall on the PB145.  :-)

As for the other part, true.  NetBSD takes the same amount of space no
matter what... a partition size is a partition size is a partition size,
and a file size is a file size is a file size... or something like
that....  Of course, if 10% is left free for defragmenting... but still,
it's not wise to set that any lower, performance suffers dramatically....
That is assuming that the partition is a boot partition.  If you're just
storing backups in .tgz format on there and update them once a week,
fragmentation isn't a big concern.

Cheers,

 /---------------------------------------------------------------------\
|David A. Gatwood             And Richard Cory, one calm summer night,  |
|davagatw@mars              Went home and put a bullet through his head.|
|dgatwood@nyx.cs.du.edu              --Edwin Arlington Robinson         |
|http://mars.utm.edu/~davagatw -or- http://nox.cs.du.edu:8001/~dgatwood |
 \---------------------------------------------------------------------/