Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 21:29:27 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Paul Schenkeveld <freebsd@psconsult.nl> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS1 vs UFS2 Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212302128320.62548@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20121230200307.GA69873@psconsult.nl> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212301420030.3192@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20121230193926.GA37126@psconsult.nl> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212302041380.4966@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20121230200307.GA69873@psconsult.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I don't think performance will be much different but if so, UFS1 would > be (sightly) faster than UFS2 because one page read will get more inodes > from disk and 32 bit (UFS1) arithmetic may be slightly faster than 64 bit > (UFS2). thanks for answer i was looking for! i will rebuild FS to UFS1, saving ca 1GB for inodes. > If performance is an issue, consider turning off atime updates or even > mount the filesystem read-only if possible. i always turn off atime and use softupdates. it cannot be readonly.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1212302128320.62548>