primm wrote: > On Friday 17 August 2007 15:53, Clayton wrote: > >>>> I upgraded some lan clients to 10.2. I notice that new installs use >>>> ext3. Is the latter better? Faster? Is there a problem with reiser? >>>> >>> http://lwn.net/Articles/202780/ >>> Summary: It does not scale. For uniprocessor, it should not make much >>> difference. But reiser3 horribly bogs down on multi-core servers, for >>> example during kernel compiles after a tarball was extracted (which is >>> what happens with `rpmbuild kernel-default.spec`.) >>> > > fwiw and this is just an uneducated observation, ext3 thrashes the disk a lot > more than reiser. You can hear it. On two identical scsi PII 450 clients the > reiser is up before the ext3 everytime. That's why I'm not sure about nfs > over multiple file systems. Another poster said that was irrelevant. I'm not > so sure. When I say up I mean the time it takes to pressing the on button on > the client and having a nis powered kdm login screen. > > Un saludo, Lynn. > What I said, was that NFS doesn't care what the file system is. However, different file systems may affect performance for everything that accesses it, not just NFS.
-- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
