Re: when will it end?

Re: when will it end?

[Andreas Sundstrom]

> On Thursday 18 November 2004 06:07, David Masover wrote:
> 
>> I was talking about perception.  People already have Windows, therefore
>> they already have Windows Defrag.  It's "free" in the sense that
>> Internet Explorer is "free".  Imagine how little Firefox's market share
>> would be if it cost money.  Notice how they can afford a full-page ad in
>> the New York Times.  Not that it's infallible, just that I don't see a
>> better business plan right now, biased as I am (I'm an end-user).
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
> 
> Sure, people know Windows, on the other hand Linux is known for not
> having a big problem with filesystem fragmentation.
> 
> http://www.willsmith.org/opensource/reiser4/fragperf/test1/
> As Reiser4 seems to do a lot better than ext3. A repacker is nice
> to have but it will only be a requirement for big businesses.
> Big businesses are usually using some kind of enterprise linux.
> Maybe Hans is able to strike a deal with some Linux distributors
> to allow for a repacker inclusion into their enterprise server
> product line. 
> 
> No Namesys, no reiser4, no need for a repacker ;-)

One thing that I care more about is that Hans mentioned the resizer in 
his e-mail. A feature which I can't live without.

[FYI: cut from another e-mail, this is a user called "Spam"]
>>
>>  Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from
>>  Executive Software.
>>
[This is Hans answer]
> MS charges for the OS, so that business model works for them.  Nobody 
> will buy a heavy resizer from us if there is a lite one.  That would be 
> as likely to happen as their buying a support contract. The lite 
> software is reiser4 without a resizer.
> 
> Such is my feel of the market.

/Andreas

when will it end?

[David Masover]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have 512 megs of RAM and one 200 gig hard drive (effectively 177 gig
filesystem) that is 86% full.  I started the reiser4 repacker two days
ago, with very minimal system use since then (an hour or two a day of
playing music and reading email).  See below for my df and top.

Thankfully, the kernel seems intelligent enough about memory management
that once things other than Doom 3 start, they run reasonably smoothly,
even video (must be that anticipatory IO scheduler).

Three questions:   When will it end?  How can I kill it if I get sick of
waiting?  Is it conceivable that the repacker could be optimized to run
faster?


$ df
Filesystem           1K-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda5            184560092 158186648  26373444  86% /
$
$ top
top - 19:46:02 up 1 day, 23:24,  3 users,  load average: 1.55, 1.25, 1.09
Tasks:  65 total,   2 running,  63 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
Cpu(s):  0.3% us, 25.6% sy,  0.0% ni, 38.5% id, 35.2% wa,  0.3% hi,  0.0% si
Mem:    516608k total,   487660k used,    28948k free,        0k buffers
Swap:   995988k total,    41844k used,   954144k free,   383936k cached

~  PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND

~ 9010 root      20   0     0    0    0 D 25.0  0.0 570:37.54
k_reiser4_repac
~ 6914 aaron     20   0  2864 1172 2500 S  0.3  0.2   1:49.04 famd

31318 sanity    20   0  3444 1684 3092 R  0.3  0.3   0:00.03 aterm

~    1 root      20   0  1332  404 1180 S  0.0  0.1   0:00.86 init

~    2 root      39  19     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.01 ksoftirqd/0

~    3 root      10 -10     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.43 events/0

~    4 root      10 -10     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.00 khelper

~    5 root      10 -10     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.00 kblockd/0

~   31 root      20   0     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:09.81 kapmd

~   36 root      10 -10     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.00 aio/0

~   35 root      20   0     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:10.46 kswapd0

~  126 root      20   0     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.00 kseriod

~  128 root      20   0     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.75
ktxnmgrd:hda5:w
~  129 root      20   0     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:02.69 ent:hda5.

~  318 root      10 -10  1312  292 1164 S  0.0  0.1   0:00.05 udevd

~ 4988 root      20   0     0    0    0 S  0.0  0.0   0:00.06 khubd

~ 6049 root      20   0  1656  524 1228 S  0.0  0.1   0:00.07 metalog







-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=MyNE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: when will it end?

[Alex Zarochentsev]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 07:57:36PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I have 512 megs of RAM and one 200 gig hard drive (effectively 177 gig
> filesystem) that is 86% full.  I started the reiser4 repacker two days
> ago, with very minimal system use since then (an hour or two a day of
> playing music and reading email).  See below for my df and top.
> 
> Thankfully, the kernel seems intelligent enough about memory management
> that once things other than Doom 3 start, they run reasonably smoothly,
> even video (must be that anticipatory IO scheduler).
> 
> Three questions:   When will it end?  How can I kill it if I get sick of
> waiting?  

try this:
echo 0 > /sys/fs/riser4/hda5/repacker/start

> Is it conceivable that the repacker could be optimized to run
> faster?

current repacker code state is 'unsupported', it is even removed from the
latest -mm kernels.   Namesys plans are to make the repacker proprietary.

-- 
Alex.

Re: when will it end?

[David Masover]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


| current repacker code state is 'unsupported', it is even removed from the
| latest -mm kernels.   Namesys plans are to make the repacker proprietary.

Really?

I sort of thought the priority was to get into the mainstream kernel, so
this seems an odd move.  Why do something that decreases your benchmark?
~ And how much would people be willing to pay you when most Unix
filesystems are rarely (if ever) repacked and Windows (even DOS, I
think) comes with a free repacker of its own?

The current state of the repacker suggests that the tradeoff is not
worth it.  If it takes longer than 2 days for an initial repack of a
filesystem like mine, the total amount of time I have to spend waiting
for the system while it's dog-slow and repacking is likely more than the
time I'd save by having it be slightly faster the rest of the time, or
even the time I'd have to work at minimum wage to buy more storage to
cover space the repacker could save me.

Compare this to Norton SpeedDisk, which takes about half an hour to
defrag a 20-40 gig FAT32/NTFS drive -- the first time.  After that, if
run daily, it takes 10-15 mins.

But also, is chunk_size measured in megabytes?  (mine was 512)  Does it
mean what I think it means?

If the repacker is still free next time I go on vacation, I'll try again
- -- see if a week or two will straighten things out.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=oGZA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: when will it end?

[Spam]

> | current repacker code state is 'unsupported', it is even removed from the
> | latest -mm kernels.   Namesys plans are to make the repacker proprietary.

> Really?

> I sort of thought the priority was to get into the mainstream kernel, so
> this seems an odd move.  Why do something that decreases your benchmark?
> ~ And how much would people be willing to pay you when most Unix
> filesystems are rarely (if ever) repacked and Windows (even DOS, I
> think) comes with a free repacker of its own?

  Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from
  Executive Software. You can buy a much more advanced version of
  Diskeeper to use in your corporate network, on your servers, or your
  desktop. It offers things like scheduling, continuos background mode
  and other things.

  http://www.executive.com/defrag/defrag.asp

  I think a free, limited/basic version of the repacker may be
  beneficial to Namesys. It would increase awareness of the feature
  and thus increase demand for a more advanced version that can work
  in corporate environments? Many/Most Linux users believe that
  repacker/defrag is never needed and this is the reason why there are
  no such tools available.

> The current state of the repacker suggests that the tradeoff is not
> worth it.  If it takes longer than 2 days for an initial repack of a
> filesystem like mine, the total amount of time I have to spend waiting
> for the system while it's dog-slow and repacking is likely more than the
> time I'd save by having it be slightly faster the rest of the time, or
> even the time I'd have to work at minimum wage to buy more storage to
> cover space the repacker could save me.

  2 days? I ran the repacker within hours on a 80GB disk. Perhaps your
  DMA and/or 32bit I/O is disabled?

  hdparm -c3 -d1 -A1 will enabled those and disk read-ahead.
  hdparm -W1 will enable disk write cache. Not recommended if you
  encounter power loss often as journals and data may be out of sync
  as the contents of the write cache is lost when a power failure
  occurs. It will speed up things a little though.

  ~S

> Compare this to Norton SpeedDisk, which takes about half an hour to
> defrag a 20-40 gig FAT32/NTFS drive -- the first time.  After that, if
> run daily, it takes 10-15 mins.

> But also, is chunk_size measured in megabytes?  (mine was 512)  Does it
> mean what I think it means?

> If the repacker is still free next time I go on vacation, I'll try again
> - -- see if a week or two will straighten things out.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

> iQIVAwUBQX88e3gHNmZLgCUhAQIXiQ//fnR727WKFmhkiP/9w02YhANuImptkokC
> KjLVJ8LkaOtz7OHecVqrIWNP2V13FDpp/Tn5Nf+h9iDeem6wF9rw4kXM6QX2NNFk
> AD5G3dYKLEMAPDkSAXYVqMv6ykI9CH61ELNHBDatfj3gBjz0uLB0kIStI6lM1nNq
> Pem2FmqWcM+3SVYEvmFuN4/oBJjwWyNav7CAWt58tvBqY703BNQmsLwEQBrcMAo8
> ifM07H0JRXT9qnKYCNKAbmUhInOAr8IUIN36OUTd/Wp35K3/1C6LicGyG6wDy51b
> aT0y4eZd0hTRZVkG5PCJ3Naz1GA56BFIts8Kvi9JtBJeza4/y0xZAtycZjeVr7Hu
> ufMjZVWgZTswiOFvNXAVFtJ6RnVDVELnKJtHI6EkFRuyJdgQKcz1oII2f//VORU0
> IST7icAw1ZSSfF08dSnhpNCFVf4ZuSAz/V6VrgFup5+cerg23DGo3bZ+K5I49//3
> hOVNC2wedl8hziNt2kKd7yDNU7WpaPR3PLOusrPsJi25YRAmIhXjDanwOt3XFA3c
> jhlTNTApj25FqphP1oCV9PNlUR0xYJXVHCnz8Aiu9ED0Yir8ECyY8Wm9Zgs1haec
> dPelzN5KioLnE5+0dLvDaYcMvewA7Vy8NwJ5z/KfcnSpD7dvH90wDE1KNbpkjZxt
> nH5vzVbtgEU=
> =oGZA
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
´

-- 

Re: when will it end?

[Hans Reiser]

Spam wrote:

>
>  Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from
>  Executive Software.
>
MS charges for the OS, so that business model works for them.  Nobody 
will buy a heavy resizer from us if there is a lite one.  That would be 
as likely to happen as their buying a support contract. The lite 
software is reiser4 without a resizer.

Such is my feel of the market.

Hans

Re: when will it end?

[Spam]

> Spam wrote:

>>
>>  Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from
>>  Executive Software.
>>
> MS charges for the OS, so that business model works for them.  Nobody
> will buy a heavy resizer from us if there is a lite one.  That would be
> as likely to happen as their buying a support contract. The lite 
> software is reiser4 without a resizer.

  Yes, you may be right. I was just voicing some options. Perhaps
  enough marketing is enough to make users learn about the repacker
  and its benefits.

  ~S

> Such is my feel of the market.

> Hans
´

-- 

Re: when will it end?

[David Masover]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hans Reiser wrote:
| Spam wrote:
|
|>
|>  Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from
|>  Executive Software.
|>
| MS charges for the OS, so that business model works for them.  Nobody
| will buy a heavy resizer from us if there is a lite one.  That would be
| as likely to happen as their buying a support contract. The lite
| software is reiser4 without a resizer.
|
| Such is my feel of the market.

Perhaps.  I'd just feel a little cheated.  Currently, without a
repacker/resizer, I would have to borrow/buy another hard drive to get
my data off reiser4, and it seems that it would slowly become more
fragmented.

What about plugins?  Application patches?  The repacker seems sort of
essential, and definitely a lot of work, but your expertise would also
be very useful for things like, say, a reiser4 backend to a traditional
SQL database.  I sincerely doubt people would be willing to pay much for
something that they see as "free" with Windows, while there's some real
potential here to create something entirely unique.  Not unique in its
benchmarks, but in its usability.

I know I'm somewhat biased, but I do prefer something entirely
proprietary to something which is sort of "half-open", like
WineX/Cedega, Lustre, etc.  It leaves a really bad taste in my mouth
when I start to get hooked on a product, only to find later on that I
have to buy some really critical feature.  Like all those "GI-Joe
Grenade Launcher" with "GI-Joe sold separately" fine-print labels.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=BGb5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: when will it end?

[Redeeman]

On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 21:09 -0500, David Masover wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hans Reiser wrote:
> | Spam wrote:
> |
> |>
> |>  Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from
> |>  Executive Software.
> |>
> | MS charges for the OS, so that business model works for them.  Nobody
> | will buy a heavy resizer from us if there is a lite one.  That would be
> | as likely to happen as their buying a support contract. The lite
> | software is reiser4 without a resizer.
> |
> | Such is my feel of the market.
> 
> Perhaps.  I'd just feel a little cheated.  Currently, without a
> repacker/resizer, I would have to borrow/buy another hard drive to get
> my data off reiser4, and it seems that it would slowly become more
> fragmented.
hmm.. well you would certainly need that with another filesystem too

> 
> What about plugins?  Application patches?  The repacker seems sort of
> essential, and definitely a lot of work, but your expertise would also
> be very useful for things like, say, a reiser4 backend to a traditional
> SQL database.  I sincerely doubt people would be willing to pay much for
> something that they see as "free" with Windows, while there's some real
you do pay in windows, but also, its more needed with ntfs and fat32 i
believe
> potential here to create something entirely unique.  Not unique in its
> benchmarks, but in its usability.
> 
> I know I'm somewhat biased, but I do prefer something entirely
> proprietary to something which is sort of "half-open", like
> WineX/Cedega, Lustre, etc.  It leaves a really bad taste in my mouth
> when I start to get hooked on a product, only to find later on that I
> have to buy some really critical feature.  Like all those "GI-Joe
> Grenade Launcher" with "GI-Joe sold separately" fine-print labels.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iQIVAwUBQYBUyHgHNmZLgCUhAQJDOg/+NIjPua8z9iAOszVpAhMxV672uSrEjTZq
> uGjPySFxjbc0UtDBHrGexIchiUnTF8L6tSzgJKoYF4lpoZ+/cMMosZ9Qxk0Agn8n
> smhvRKz+pWr5my0PVMUxcUrsYtfhqiHEO+zRSLX/LJ22b6Qiy3yOxKgV74AylpSi
> ZtINahQicT0sbok0n0UAt5Zk4yzJPj3+R7J3TUEAgatisZhWGwr5w9WIVIGHVsYa
> YwXsX8AparnfLhh700DSg5k0OWCBf1gZs+iXN1Oy1G6x1z7cVtqB+nHjZPPYEoFx
> B3zRYYm1M2LGuNe6tqpLwM0jufBZ2ZOMbsGA0Kbg2c/zSBviOjZfq+oTrtUdiFKU
> Log4sVRH/rk8H1B4DqG0iEwLwjZ4Q+q3DAs9c2GKPS7VQ+fb/UjATd1HlBFYCVtG
> hN12UHI2Tg6wTsn2fhp9Q48BKd/D4g5LEKbZ4fYhtrPOqDSVV3d3lMPTp1Lxtv0j
> AXyEyouClEOvAr0eLTLTX31M5Negg+MX+z82NwW3kTigw/DFVsTY3jo3qJqZ9iHT
> NKAbF3hHYarhC1w+Z607of2CO1dQqkC3Gs0XgN3qKQ0yN4kRJcWyXeVzAtkOOinY
> Ymou+1v70t3ZVNgraV+znIVQelT2xHWNuK58D6WLALZPHN3kXrzIZvQNpt72ZwqM
> RnPLTLuSX4o=
> =BGb5
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
-- 
Redeeman <redeeman@metanurb.dk>

Re: when will it end?

[David Masover]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[...]

| Perhaps.  I'd just feel a little cheated.  Currently, without a
| repacker/resizer, I would have to borrow/buy another hard drive to get
| my data off reiser4, and it seems that it would slowly become more
| fragmented.
|
|> hmm.. well you would certainly need that with another filesystem too

Doesn't cost me money with another filesystem.  In particular, I can
resize reiserfs (v3) for no cost (resize_reiserfs), meaning that
repartitioning/reformatting is slow, but requires no extra hardware.
Shrink fs, shrink partition, grow new partition, copy files, rinse,
repeat.  Probably difficult for drive more than 50% full.  Parted seems
to support this for quite a few filesystems, actually.

| What about plugins?  Application patches?  The repacker seems sort of
| essential, and definitely a lot of work, but your expertise would also
| be very useful for things like, say, a reiser4 backend to a traditional
| SQL database.  I sincerely doubt people would be willing to pay much for
| something that they see as "free" with Windows, while there's some real
|
|> you do pay in windows, but also, its more needed with ntfs and fat32 i
|> believe

I was talking about perception.  People already have Windows, therefore
they already have Windows Defrag.  It's "free" in the sense that
Internet Explorer is "free".  Imagine how little Firefox's market share
would be if it cost money.  Notice how they can afford a full-page ad in
the New York Times.  Not that it's infallible, just that I don't see a
better business plan right now, biased as I am (I'm an end-user).

[...]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=ye9Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: when will it end?

[Christian Mayrhuber]

On Thursday 18 November 2004 06:07, David Masover wrote:

> I was talking about perception.  People already have Windows, therefore
> they already have Windows Defrag.  It's "free" in the sense that
> Internet Explorer is "free".  Imagine how little Firefox's market share
> would be if it cost money.  Notice how they can afford a full-page ad in
> the New York Times.  Not that it's infallible, just that I don't see a
> better business plan right now, biased as I am (I'm an end-user).
> 
> [...]
> 

Sure, people know Windows, on the other hand Linux is known for not
having a big problem with filesystem fragmentation.

http://www.willsmith.org/opensource/reiser4/fragperf/test1/
As Reiser4 seems to do a lot better than ext3. A repacker is nice
to have but it will only be a requirement for big businesses.
Big businesses are usually using some kind of enterprise linux.
Maybe Hans is able to strike a deal with some Linux distributors
to allow for a repacker inclusion into their enterprise server
product line. 

No Namesys, no reiser4, no need for a repacker ;-)

-- 
lg, Chris

Re: when will it end?

[Thomas Graham]

you can not assume normal user wouldn't need repacker, if fragment cause
problem for end-user, people will escape from it, as I got 300GB data on
reiser3fs or I move into freebsd for less trouble, tiny market is
important, don't consider it's too small to think of, it might cause you
more trouble than you think.


> On Thursday 18 November 2004 06:07, David Masover wrote:
>
>> I was talking about perception.  People already have Windows, therefore
>> they already have Windows Defrag.  It's "free" in the sense that
>> Internet Explorer is "free".  Imagine how little Firefox's market share
>> would be if it cost money.  Notice how they can afford a full-page ad in
>> the New York Times.  Not that it's infallible, just that I don't see a
>> better business plan right now, biased as I am (I'm an end-user).
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> Sure, people know Windows, on the other hand Linux is known for not
> having a big problem with filesystem fragmentation.
>
> http://www.willsmith.org/opensource/reiser4/fragperf/test1/
> As Reiser4 seems to do a lot better than ext3. A repacker is nice
> to have but it will only be a requirement for big businesses.
> Big businesses are usually using some kind of enterprise linux.
> Maybe Hans is able to strike a deal with some Linux distributors
> to allow for a repacker inclusion into their enterprise server
> product line.
>
> No Namesys, no reiser4, no need for a repacker ;-)
>
> --
> lg, Chris
>


-- 
HK Celtic Orchestra leader and coordanator: Thomas Graham Lau
Phone number: 852-93239670    (24hours a day, 7days a week non-stop phone)
Web site: http://sml.dyndns.org
Email: lkthomas@sml.dyndns.org

Re: when will it end?

[Alex Zarochentsev]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 07:57:36PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I have 512 megs of RAM and one 200 gig hard drive (effectively 177 gig
> filesystem) that is 86% full.  I started the reiser4 repacker two days
> ago, with very minimal system use since then (an hour or two a day of
> playing music and reading email).  See below for my df and top.

200GB / 48 / 3600 ~=  1MB/sec, right?

I think it is a bug.  Hopefully, after some developing efforts, the repacker
whould work faster. 

-- 
Alex.

Re: when will it end?

[David Masover]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
| On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 07:57:36PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
|
|>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|>Hash: SHA1
|>
|>I have 512 megs of RAM and one 200 gig hard drive (effectively 177 gig
|>filesystem) that is 86% full.  I started the reiser4 repacker two days
|>ago, with very minimal system use since then (an hour or two a day of
|>playing music and reading email).  See below for my df and top.
|
|
| 200GB / 48 / 3600 ~=  1MB/sec, right?

Assuming I'd let it finish.  I didn't, so I have absolutely no idea how
far along it was.  I suspect that it wasn't going to finish.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=2WW9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: when will it end?

[mjt]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 08:49:52PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
>
>Assuming I'd let it finish.  I didn't, so I have absolutely no idea how
>far along it was.  I suspect that it wasn't going to finish.

AFAICT there is no way to see where the repacker is going :P

-- 
mjt