<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 5:48 PM, David Moore <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dmoo1790@ihug.co.nz">dmoo1790@ihug.co.nz</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im"><br>
On 22/12/2010, at 2:19 PM, <a href="mailto:criggie@criggie.dyndns.org">criggie@criggie.dyndns.org</a> wrote:<br>
<br>
> On 21/12/10 20:59, <a href="mailto:criggie@criggie.dyndns.org">criggie@criggie.dyndns.org</a> wrote:<br>
>> You need a filesystem that deletes 1-10 GB files quickly, so that<br>
>> would<br>
>> be JFS or XFS.<br>
><br>
> Data point - I just deleted 448 GB in 3 files from an ext4 partition<br>
> in<br>
> 26.95 seconds (16.6 GB/sec)<br>
><br>
> and 129 GB in 3 files from a JFS partition in 0.678 seconds (190 GB/<br>
> sec)<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Criggie<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://criggie.dyndns.org/" target="_blank">http://criggie.dyndns.org/</a><br>
><br>
</div>Cool. I had read some stuff about how EXT4 was getting slower, not<br>
faster, as it was developed. I'll probably go with JFS after a little<br>
more reading about it.<br>
<br>
Thanks to all who have commented so far.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
___<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Just to keep some balance... I've been using XFS on a system that has run non-stop for over three years without any problems at all. No experience of JFS. I think I picked XFS at the time because of that bit of science (?) about it being able to handle small numbers of large files, which is really what MythTV does.<br>
<br>My 2c<br><br>- David <br></div></div>