Lori,
It's an index value based on how full the volume is.
It's a bit arbitrary as far as values go, but the gist of the output is
that you've got less fragmentation than the scanner expected you to
have.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of Lori Barfield
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 12:02 AM
To: toasters(a)mathworks.com
Subject: Re: wafl scan reallocate
On 3/7/06, Glenn Walker <ggwalker(a)mindspring.com> wrote:
> Looks like you are doing pretty good...
>
> Keep in mind, it's an average, so for specific data sets in the volume
> it may be much higher (or lower). Workload measurements (statit
during
> specific operations) can tell you much more sometimes.
>
> Filling the volume is typically a bad idea (tm) as WAFL will spend
more
> time finding free space to write. If this is a flexvol and the aggr
has
> tons of space available, this is not a concern.
>
> 7.X has great improvements on fixing fragmentation and preventative
> measures to keep it from becoming an issue.
>
> Remember: Fragmentation is NORMAL with any filesystem and isn't
> necessarily a problem. What fragmentation _does_ do is introduce
> latencies that can be detrimental to responsiveness... sometimes this
> can be felt (ie, it's a problem), sometimes it cannot be felt...
thanks, glenn. can you tell us what this means?
Based on your free space, 6.53 is expected.
...lori