From owner-freebsd-current Thu Nov 14 07:59:21 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA28534 for current-outgoing; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 07:59:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from news1.gtn.com (news1.gtn.com [192.109.159.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA28377 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 07:59:08 -0800 (PST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by news1.gtn.com (8.7.2/8.7.2) with UUCP id QAA29502; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 16:45:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by klemm.gtn.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with SMTP id QAA01908; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 16:01:34 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 16:01:34 +0100 (MET) From: Andreas Klemm To: Mark Mayo cc: Terry Lambert , Ollivier Robert , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ufs is too slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-try-apsfilter: ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/Printing/aps-491.tgz X-Fax: +49 2137 2018 X-Phone: +49 2137 2020 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, Mark Mayo wrote: > Just curious, how would a NTFS perform in this scenario? As far as I > remember, NTFS allows btree directory structures. Also NTFS allows per > file compression, and "live" partition extension (making a logical drive > spread across multiple disks, or extending the size of a logical partition > on the current disk). One exception, the logical drive must not be a system partition (boot partition or a swapfile on it). You are only allowed to extend upto 32 _pure data_ volumes. > It seems to me that NTFS has quite a bit of > functionality, but how does it perform compared to UFS - under the > 'general' and extreme cases (such as news). BTW: one undocumented feature of NTFS is, that it fragments ! Our developers got a tool from a ftp site, that reported severe fragmentation. ewwwwww! That explained the loss of filesystem performance over some weeks... BTW, who would love to write additionally an fsck for it ?! When trying to implement NTFS, don't forget this ;) If I had to choose between ufs and NTFS, I'd choose UFS ;) I would use NTFS only for playing ;) -- andreas@klemm.gtn.com /\/\___ Wiechers & Partner Datentechnik GmbH Andreas Klemm ___/\/\/ Support Unix -- andreas.klemm@wup.de pgp p-key http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html >>> powered by <<< ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/Printing/aps-491.tgz >>> FreeBSD <<<