**Subject:** Re: Minimum swap size

**To:** Bill Studenmund *<wrstuden@netbsd.org>*

**From:** The Black Hacker *<blackye@break.net>*

**List:** tech-kern

**Date:** 05/20/2003 18:50:55
On Tuesday, May 20, 2003, at 17:52 Europe/Rome, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> If fsck has any algorithms that go faster than O(n), one bigger
> partition
s/faster/slower/ ... or "whose complexity grows faster than...", then I
understand it :)
> will take longer than two smaller ones. fsck used to have O(n^3)
> algorithms in it. ISTR Charles fixed a number of them.
I have no idea about the internals of fsck, but I can't conceptually
see reasons why it cannot be made run linear or, at worse,
O(N lg N): and even with N lg N would not make a *concrete*
difference splitting the filesystem in smaller pieces.
Ciao,
A.
--------------------------
Andrea Cocito
IEO -- European Institute of Oncology
Department of Experimental Oncology
Fundamental bioinformatics research group - Director
Via Ripamonti 435
20141 Milano - Italy
tel: +39-02-57489857
fax: +39-02-57489851