On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 21:28:53 -0500 "Brett I. Holcomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 04:48:42PM -0800, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> On 12/03/02 16:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Okay, now we're down to cases. ext3 is not immune to data loss, but it is
> > far less so than ext2. I don't have a terrabyte raid array to worry about,
> > so a "stupid time-consuming fsck" takes, oh, 10 minutes. Despite the
>
> Is ext3 faster than ext2?
No... same for XFS. ANY linux journaling fs will be slower than ext2...
--
******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=linux
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
10:05pm up 10 days, 23:48, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
_______________________________________________
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
