| |||||||||||||
33 MB overhead with ext333 MB overhead with ext3Posted Aug 26, 2004 12:28 UTC (Thu) by mtk77 (guest, #6040)In reply to: 33 MB overhead with ext3 by dmantione Parent article: Looking at reiser4
As with inodes, so with journals. reiserfs4 doesn't preallocate the journal either. (*Disclaimer* this as I understand it.)
(Log in to post comments)
33 MB overhead with ext3 Posted Aug 26, 2004 14:31 UTC (Thu) by erich (subscriber, #7127) [Link] I do not understand why preallocating the journal or inode tables is considered a bad thing.In the rare cases where one wants to store single big files on a hard disc, neither ext3 or reiserfs with default options is the best choice.
If the journal is allocated when creating the filesystem it probably is placed at the beginning which usually is the faster area of the disc, isn't it? Also it is contiguous, which should increase performance, too.
But i'm not an expert at all. I just dislike things that are taken for better without giving reasons to do so.
swapfiles Posted Aug 27, 2004 14:59 UTC (Fri) by Luyseyal (guest, #15693) [Link] Actually, I read awhile back that swap files are now just as fast as swap partitions due to some VFS magic.
-l
|
|||||||||||||