On Sat, 20 Mar 2010, Dan Parsons wrote: > One thing that immediately comes to mind is it will be fsck'd every > time it's not unmounted cleanly (as opposed to just having its journal > replayed for ext3). > > In practical terms though, I don't think it really matters that much, > though personally I'd just put ext3 there too, because I don't think > the difference will be noticeable.
it depends a lot on what you are doing. I have measured differences of 3x performance by putting things on ext2 vs ext3. In my case it was an application writing a queue file to disk where the application did the appropriate fsync commands so the data was safe, but on /tmp where you have lots of file activity of small files I could see the same type of win. another option to look at would be ext4 without journaling. ext2/3 suffer when you have large files (including large directories), ext4 fixes a lot of this pain. David Lang _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
