On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Roger Oberholtzer wrote: > Interesting. I wonder what the most and least efficient linux fs is for > many small files. In some of my data collection systems, this is a common > file type. Others will have this and some files that are quite large. But > never as many very large files.
About a year ago, ReiserFS was the best at efficiently storing small files, and XFS was the best at efficeintly storing large files. I think things might have changed somewhat on the small end since then, but XFS is still king at the large end. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lonni J Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo http://netllama.ipfox.com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
