| From: | Xavier Messersmith |
| Date: | 14 Aug 2000 at 22:00:37 |
| Subject: | Re: SFS + 3.5 |
On 14-Aug-00, Kisa 2o0o wrote:
>>> This test gave WRONG results! Upon this test deleting file
>>> on FFS is faster (!!!) then on SFS ?! Try to create a very
>>> huge file (ISO image is ok) and then delete it! IT take about
>>> 2-3 mins on FFS! and only few seconds on SFS !!!
>>
>> I don't have SFS on any partitions yet, but I tested deletion of an ISO
>> image, 590 Megs in size, in FFS.
>>
>> It took less than 2 seconds on an A2000.
>>
>> So if faster deleting is a reason for installing SFS, I might not
>> bother!
Now try a bunch of small files!
> filesystems - there is another hard limit on our beloved FFS - length of
> filenames! Yes, 31 symbols was good for previous years, now we live in the
> world with a very long file names - this is one of the most serious resons
> why I was looking for new filesystem,
I think the softlink limit is also something of a pain.
(or did FFS implement that recently?)
> PFS nadling long filenames very well, but it stole about 10% of partition
> size for its own needs thats the point why it lose battle against SFS.
Are you sure that space wasn't going to be handed back when the drive went
full for the sake of speed and fragmentation avoidance?
> I used PFS for a long time till now after all I lose about 200 megz on all my
> PFS partitions on 6 Gb drive. =(
200 megs off a 6 GB drive is 3%, not 10.