The theory behind the partitioning proposal of yast2-storage-ng is that all possible distributions of partitions in the disk are evaluated and the best one, according to this criteria, is chosen. But I have found several examples in which is hard believe that the result is actually the optimal distribution of partitions.

So I want to invest some time checking if the error is on my side and the code is indeed proposing the best solution and, if that's not the case, improving the decision making of the code.


Done. See comments.

Looking for hackers with the skills:

Nothing? Add some keywords!

This project is part of:

Hack Week 16


  • over 6 years ago: joseivanlopez liked this project.
  • over 6 years ago: ancorgs started this project.
  • over 6 years ago: ancorgs originated this project.

  • Comments

    • ancorgs
      over 6 years ago by ancorgs | Reply

      I found the culprit line here.

      According to that, it is preferred that all the partitions created by the proposal are as grouped as possible. That is, adjacent to each other instead of being spread over several places of the disk(s).

      Although it may have some value, I don't think that criteria should be stronger (first in the list) than the next one ("the bigger installation the better"). Swaping both already gives me results I like more... but still not perfect. I want to introduce just another criteria to break the tie in two installations that are equally big.

      BTW, I tried to research the rationale behind the current list of criteria and I can't find any reason to keep the fragmentation as more important than the total size. Feel free to disagree.

    • ancorgs
      over 6 years ago by ancorgs | Reply

      Better criteria implemented in

      Now the look of criteria looks like this. As you can see, I moved two other criteria (total installation size and good distribution according to volume sizes) in front of the fragmentation one.

    Similar Projects

    This project is one of its kind!