On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 15:44 -0700, Tim Hammerquist wrote: > Mark C. Ballew wrote: > > The BSD's[0] use "Soft updates" instead of journaling in the default > > filesystem. I'm really not qualified to talk about performance, but I > > found a paper on it you can read: > > > > http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/papers/mckusick99.pdf > > > > [0]This excludes OS X, which uses HFS+[1] by default > > [1] OS X's HFS+ is a journaling filesystem that supports the UTF-8 > charset for filenames. It's not really great as far as performance, > being on par with ext3 in my experience, but Apple needed a filesystem > that would support resource forks a la classic HFS.
OS X does offer UFS, but I don't think it supports extended attributes like HFS+ does. It also doesn't work with a lot of OS X native apps. HFS + appears slow to me, much like ext2. The FFS BSD system "feels" faster with soft updates on in Open and FreeBSD, but I have no benchmarks to prove any of this. Mark -- Mark C. Ballew Reno, Nevada [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://markballew.com PGP: 0xB2A33008 AIM: pdx110
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ RLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
