On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 01:23:48PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote: > On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 02:21:48AM -0400, Tim McGrath spake thusly: > > So, basically reiser3 is unusuable by mostly anyone who doesn't want > > high cpu usage for their filesystem. Hell, it nearly *crippled* my poor > > demented 486 when I tried using it on it. But, that's a single case - > > however it does demonstrate that the fs really does need a large amount > > of cpu time just to function. > > I have to disagree with this. reiser uses more cpu to gain more effective > disk usage. Spending some extra time in cpu to prevent a much longer disk > seek is a huge net gain. You can't evaluate the overall performance just > by looking at cpu usage.
Unless you happen to be doing something that stresses its weak points. Ext2 for example has problems with large directories (and therefore large datastores), although this is rectified with 2.6's htree support. Any further correspondance on this thread should go to the chat list. > > -- > Tracy Reed > http://ultraviolet.org -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
