Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:

On a sunny day (Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:06:03 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

Yes, but windows will start faster then it takes to resize a reiserfs from 830 to 600 GB:

grml: ~ # resize_reiserfs -s 600G /dev/sda8 resize_reiserfs 3.6.19 (2003

You are running BETA version of reiserfs shrinker. This version is only for testing or VERY CAREFUL use. Backup of you data is recommended.

)))Do I give a shit about having to read in 300 DVDs or so again ???

Do you want to continue? [y/N]:y Processing the tree: 0% left

145312383, 2333 /sec

)))YES 145312383 seconds ........ )))Well, it seems 400 hours, the point is somewhere I dunno, but I timed some.

zsh: suspended resize_reiserfs -s 600G /dev/sda8 ))) So I stopped it with ctrl Z. Now running fsck to see if I can get out of this without a week extra work... That will take 10 minutes to an hour...

Then I think if reiserfs works the way I hope it does (sane), that it puts files at the start of a partition, I will use a hex editor to look at some parts of the (new) disk to see if the area above 600 GB is clear, and then repartition... LOL.

So, I have learned: Do NOT use reiserfs 3 if you have all 3 GB files on a 830 GB partition, as it is then SLOWER THE A HEAVY SEDATED SNAIL.

to 600 GB:

From wiki:

ReiserFS was the default file system in Novell's SUSE Linux Enterprise until Novell decided to move to ext3 on October 12, 2006 for future releases. [1] Although the change was rumored to be a result of principal author Hans Reiser being charged with the murder of his wife (he was later convicted[2] ) two days earlier, SUSE stated that the timing of the announcement was coincidental and unrelated.[3]

John

For some of them, sure... but 25MB in LISP!? Just to print "hello, world!?" C'mon... Even Pascal, at 107k -- more than 10x what C requires -- is pretty embarassing.

It's an interpreter.

John

Not for simple arithmetic, but it starts to get awkward if you're writing a non-trivial piece of software.

It's probably not so bad if you use either PostScript or Forth day in, day out, but I find that I end up having to put a comment describing the current stack contents between every line of code. That, and having every non-trivial function store its arguments in a dictionary so that I can reference them by name.

to 600 GB:

What sane person resizes a file system? While it has DATA on it???

Thanks, Rich

to 600 GB:

Reiser is also the default install for Slackware. I've been using it ever since Patrick Volkerding approved it for Slack systems. ;-)

I've never lost data at a power outage, knock wood. ;-) ;-)

Cheers! Rich

On a sunny day (Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:23:19 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

Well, first I managed to get the reiserfs working again... second I do not give a lot about what side of the bars 'murderers' are on as long as GWBush, he who murdered a million innocent Iraqis, is still on the opposite side of the bars as Hans Reiser there remain logical questions for me :-) Third, more important in the wikipedia article is this:

Also, ReiserFS had a problem with very fast filesystem aging when compared to other filesystems - in several usage scenarios filesystem performance lowered dramatically with time.

I just found out I am in of of those scenarios, many large files (say average about 3 GB each), on a very large partition (890 GB). At 67 % full, things slow down by more then 50 %. /dev/sda8 897504508 584250820 313253688 66% /mnt/sda8

Holly golly I have 775 disks .. (CD + DVD) now in a box, got myself one of those big alu 1000 DVD storage boxes.... And I still keep finding disks all over the place. A lot are now copied to that harddisk. The box went to the attic.

Suse is in bed with MS... I was a Suse user with version 7.2, but then when Novel bought it, and I went to grml

More for servers. If you want small and fast, that is the one, it is debian based. I have modified it so it is now more 'Panteltje Linux'. Maybe I should ... hehe

And it won't raise your blood pressure as much, either. (Although a reasonably fresh XP install is tolerable.)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

On a sunny day (Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:32:00 GMT) it happened Rich Grise wrote in :

OK Richman, I will try to explain it to you, so you will be a bit wiser. As the very large file system fills up with hundreds of gigabytes, it becomes slower and slower. To keep speed usable it is better to have several smaller partitions, with separate file systems, so the balanced trees for reiserfs do not grow into the sky. As it is slow with 66 % fill, I could resize it to say 67%, and then resize that partition to 67 %, and then make a new partition of 33 %, and accessing data on that new one would be then be faster, Filling this one up to 100 % would slow down almost to a halt. Actually I would like to try ext4 file system on the newly created partition, to see how it behaves with huge files.

Not necessarily. Lisp compilers date back to the 1980s - I worked on one. They were among the earliest incremental compilers.

I cannot recall exactly what the Procyon Common Lisp compiler for the Mac made of "Hello World" but it would probably have been under 100kb.

WCL on a SPARC manages it in about 40kb. See for example:

And there were Lisp implementations on the BBC Micro that had to fit into the 64kb address space of the puny 6502.

Regards, Martin Brown

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:52:31 +0000, Jan Panteltje wrote: ...

Why not? Write some whiz-bang install scripts! Just do X, gpm, the network adapter and all that schtuff automagically, to make as easy to install as Winblows, and Aunt-Tilly friendly. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

into the sky.

that partition to 67 %,

would be then be faster,

Oh. I'd have just verified that I have everything backed up, and used fdisk.

To each his own, I guess. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Saying that McDonalds sells good food is like saying that RadioShaft sells good electronics.

Fair point.

Turbo Pascal wasn't though, as I recall... probably explained some of its popularity... (I even wrote a few little utility programs with it back in the late '80s while playing intern at IBM... IBM had an amazing internal network, that already had lots of internally developed bits of software and documentation, much like what the web is today... albeit all accessed through

3270-series text-mode "smart" terminals!)

---Joel

At that size, my guess is that it's a frozen memory image, containing the interpreter, the program, the data, and a lot of free space which was pre-emptively requested from the OS but isn't actually being used for anything.

Maybe not always:

finishes

5ms.

passing,

No two versions of BASIC, even from the same company are compatible. At one point, microsoft even made visual basic incompatible with it's last major release. BASIC is only good for throwaway code. Write it; run it; toss it. Toss anything you learn too.

Do I have to give all the money back?

John