Is there any difference in a file systems layout and efficiency between
to xfs fs's of the same size, but where one was created at size '100%',
where the other was created at size 50%, but then grown iteratively
to 60, 70, 80, 90 and then 100% over time as it filled?
Would the final file systems look pretty much the same and have roughly the
same performance characteristics? Assume, for sake of argument, that the
file system was grown before space got tight enough to cause any severe
large file fragmentation.
I've been under the impression that one gained some performance benefits if one
laid out the whole file system at once is that a mis-impression?
That asked/said...is there any work underway to create an xfs_shrinkfs, so
that one could go the other way?