[wellylug] Lightweight browsers, and window managers

[Sam Cannell]

It is a good thing, yes ... They improve filesystem resiliency in the
case of a power failure or similar, but it does come at a performance
cost.

There's a description of the idea behind it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journaling_filesystem

However if the information about your swapfile in the filesystem's
superblock becomes corrupted, at worst you're going to have to delete
your swapfile and re-create it again which isn't going to cause any data
loss.  Therefore, it's really not worth the speed drop. :)

On a side note, it's quite interesting to compare the speeds of the
different filesystems available now... Last time I looked, reiserfs was
really really fast with small files, but fell over in comparison to the
others (ext3, jfs and xfs) when handling large files.  Ain't it great to
have choices? :)

On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 14:33, Nick Jensen wrote:
> >If you absoultely have to have a swap file, try to put it on a fast,
> >non-journalled filesystem like ext2 if you have one available to keep
> >the overhead as low as possible.
> 
> Is ext2 generally faster than ext3? I thought the journalling was a good 
> thing - although I don't really know what it does.
-- 
Sam Cannell <sam at plaz.net.nz>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wellylug.org.nz/pipermail/wellylug/attachments/20040712/f2732843/attachment.pgp