This is not s390 specific, but I was wondering if anyone has any good
links or references to information comparing overhead of different
filesystems, either disk or CPU. Particularly any that compare disk
overhead for ext3 (I know the size of the journal will make a
difference) and ntfs.
Also,
There are some presentations that go through the various performance
measurements of the various filesystems. You can check
linuxvm.org/present to download them.
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 10:03, Daniel Jarboe wrote:
This is not s390 specific, but I was wondering if anyone has any good
links or
PROTECTED]
Subject: filesystem overhead
This is not s390 specific, but I was wondering if anyone has any good
links or references to information comparing overhead of different
filesystems, either disk or CPU. Particularly any that compare disk
overhead for ext3 (I know the size of the journal
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 10:03, Daniel Jarboe wrote:
Also, to copy filesystems I typically see tar piped to tar
recommended... is there any reason to favor that method over cp -a on
systems that support it?
Not really. It's just that cp -a is a GNUism and relatively recent.
Adam
Post, Mark K writes:
Since ext3 is advertised as ext2 with a journal, I would say that the
journal is the only additional overhead you'll see in terms of disk space
usage.
Hmm, sort of. From the point of view of purely disk space usage,
that's true, as you say. Further, ext3 is indeed ext2
Particularly any that compare disk
overhead for ext3 (I know the size of the journal will make a
difference) and ntfs.
Filesystem overhead depends on the data you put on the filesystems
(typical file size,
amount of files per directory and such). In a given scenario, use
/proc/partitions to see
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 17:41, Post, Mark K wrote:
tested, compared to JFS or Reiserfs. There appeared to be a nasty
interaction between Reiserfs and VM time slicing that was causing an
extraordinary number of SIE dropouts per second, which was chewing up a
Hmm... I *do* know about a bug in
