From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 9 May 2001 17:23:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 May 2001 17:23:28 -0400 Received: from pneumatic-tube.sgi.com ([204.94.214.22]:11595 "EHLO pneumatic-tube.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 May 2001 17:23:14 -0400 Message-Id: <200105092125.f49LPew13300@jen.americas.sgi.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Alan Cox cc: martin@bugs.unl.edu.ar (=?iso-8859-1?q?Mart=EDn=20Marqu=E9s?=), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: reiserfs, xfs, ext2, ext3 In-Reply-To: Message from Alan Cox of "Wed, 09 May 2001 15:49:17 BST." Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 16:25:40 -0500 From: Steve Lord Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > XFS is very fast most of the time (deleting a file is sooooo slow its like us > ing > old BSD systems). Im not familiar enough with its behaviour under Linux yet. Hmm, I just removed 2.2 Gbytes of data in 30000 files in 37 seconds (14.4 seconds system time), not tooo slow. And that is on a pretty vanilla 2 cpu linux box with a not very exciting scsi drive. > > What you might want to do is to make a partition for 'mystery journalling fs' > and benchmark a bit. > > Alan > I agree with Alan here, the only sure fire way to find out which filesystem will work best for your application is to try it out. I have found reiserfs to be very fast in some tests, especially those operating on lots of small files, but contrary to some peoples, belief XFS is good for a lot more than just messing with Gbyte long data files. Steve Lord