On 7 Sep 2001, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> And guess what ? the "ext3 is often faster" scales miserably to this
> bench. We can also talk about JFS. Well, they are both winning the prize
> for slowest FS, great ;p.
> my proper typical use of my machine, I'd choose ext2 (or reiser notail) if
> I consider these results.
Some everyday experience -- I'll never choose jfs for filesystem with lots
of small files, in this case jfs seems to be the worst, *WAY* worse than
ext3 or reiserfs. Haven't tried xfs though.
Abel
