On Tue, 17 Dec 1996, Paul Goyette wrote:

> Actually, I think it refers to whether or not small files will be 
> allocated into fragments of the normal disk allocation units.  In 
> optimization TIME, the file system doesn't spend the extra time looking 
> for a block with a big enuf fragment left over, instead just allocates an 
> entire new block;  optimization SPACE spends the extra time to look for a 
> block with space left, thus taking longer but using less space.

Sheesh.  If only HFS had that ability....  :-)

That explanation makes sense, since the installer probably wouldn't want
to waste time handling such a triviality, but then, in that case, I guess
it would take more space.  In which case, I guess the original poster
probably should use tunefs to change the setting to optimizaction SPACE,
so the kernel can get back that extra room, right?

Thanks for correcting me on that one.  That's nice to know.

Later,

 /---------------------------------------------------------------------\
|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 |
 \---------------------------------------------------------------------/