33 MB overhead with ext3
Posted Aug 26, 2004 14:31 UTC (Thu) by erich
In reply to: 33 MB overhead with ext3
Parent article: Looking at reiser4
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.
(why is using a swap partition better than using a swap file? similar reasons)
But i'm not an expert at all. I just dislike things that are taken for better without giving reasons to do so.
to post comments)