Problem with an external usb HD - slow usb

JD jd1008 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 4 05:04:07 UTC 2010


On 08/03/2010 09:31 PM, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:12 PM, JD<jd1008 at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> If you want even better performance, reiserfs4 was benchmarked to
>> exceed ALL other
>>   Linux filesystems, including xfs, ext2/3/4
>> See  http://kerneltrap.org/node/6776
> How do you get that from your link?  The article has nothing to do
> with Reiser 4 and the post from Hans Resier containing the clams you
> make is from 2006 (4 years ago, before he went to prison, where he
> remains).  What does this have to do with Reiser 4 vs. ext4
> performance *today*, 4 years later?
>
Here is the conclusion from 2009:

Conclusion: REISERFS and JFS are pretty close contenders for first 
place, followed by BTRFS and EXT4. Good old EXT3 would be my pick for 
fifth, leaving XFS and the still immature, but interesting log based 
filesystem NILFS2 in last place.

At URL:
http://agcbsm.blogspot.com/2009/12/linux-filesystem-benchmarks.html

Also, benchmarks in 2008:
Ext4 is great for /small/ files read, read+write, and delete.
But for /medium/ files, resiserfs outshines it by a very good margin.
Ditto for /large/ files read+write - resierfs shines the best.

See 
http://www.jejik.com/articles/2008/04/benchmarking_linux_filesystems_on_software_raid_1/

unfortunately, there is a dearth of "/official/" benchmarks for linux 
filesystems that are very recent
(ca. 2009/2010).




More information about the users mailing list