> Is this something being thought about??
> More than one of my hard disks:
> /boot: 130 files in 103112 4K blocks: 793.6 blks/file
> /tmp: 1401 files in 746715 4K blocks: 533.4 blks/file
> /var/cache: 1438 files in 87858 4K blocks: 61.5 blks/file
> /backups: 713 files in 2523985177 4K blocks: 3539951.6 blks/file
> /var: 9038 files in 746715 4K blocks: 83.1 blks/file
> /var/cache/squid: 570 files in 90031 4K blocks: 158.4 blks/file
> /Media: 51893 files in 1691400956 4K blocks: 32594.5 blks/file
> /: 37312 files in 506778 4K blocks: 14.0 blks/file
> /usr/share: 320805 files in 195425485 4K blocks: 609.6 blks/file
> /backups/Media: 50544 files in 1642550112 4K blocks: 32497.9 blks/file
> /usr: 116650 files in 1389380 4K blocks: 12.4 blks/file
> /Share: 1617995 files in 305269701 4K blocks: 189.1 blks/file
> /home: 5822174 files in 195412389 4K blocks: 34.0 blks/file
> All but 2 could benefit from a 16K block size, and 3 of them could benefit
> from a 128K block size. Wouldn't that benefit in in freeing up some space
> both on disk and in memory? Just a thought.
The maximum block size of a XFS filesystem is 64kiB. But in linux it's limited
to the PAGE_SIZE value. so, on x86 architectures, the maximum block size is
although it could benefit from a 16kiB page size, you'll need to be running an
operating system which supports this page size value.