User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

33 MB overhead with ext3

33 MB overhead with ext3

Posted Aug 26, 2004 14:31 UTC (Thu) by erich (guest, #7127)
In reply to: 33 MB overhead with ext3 by mtk77
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.

(Log in to post comments)


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.


Copyright © 2018, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds