Pero acá alguien duda de que ext3 sea peor: Re: [a-users] File Systems? De: tim hall <[email protected]> (GlastonburyMusic) Para: AGNULA user forum <[email protected]> Fecha: 23/01/06 16:28 On Sunday 22 January 2006 20:43, Dominique Michel was like:
Surely you mean ext3?
You may be right, because I have changed it. I use ext2.
The advantage of reiser and xfs over ext3 is at reiser and xfs have a journal that's built into the data stream somehow and not a separate file. I have learn that only recently and I have choose ext2 because at I get big trouble onetime with an ext3 partition where the journal was crashed.
It should be possible to rebuild the journal. Not sure how you do that offhand.
Basiquelly I see ext3 as an ext2 filesystem with a journal, so the performances will not be better. The article on
http://myweb.cableone.net/eviltwin69/Arcana.html#Mark%20Knecht's%20filesyst
em%20tests semm to say the same thing with other word. He get worst result with ext3 as with ext2. It is the case because the ext3 fs must stop to write the datas when it write the journal.
Yes, this is absolutely true. However, when testing software with realtime privileges, journalling is a _must_ :|. As the journal is a bolt-on in ext3 it required less head-scratching at the time.
So I will try to change my system partition to reiser or xfs when I get some time.
Be interested to hear how you get on. -- Marcos Guglielmetti Coordinador del desarrollo de Musix GNU+Linux (www.musix.org.ar) Mirrors: (www.musix.distrux.net) (www.pc-musica.com.ar/musix) (www.k-maleon.com/musix) ___________________________________________________________ 1GB gratis, Antivirus y Antispam Correo Yahoo!, el mejor correo web del mundo http://correo.yahoo.com.ar