You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
While mounting 2 hard drives and 1 partiton at bootup, I get about a 15 second delay. Any ideas why, or what I can do to background this, or speed it up?
Thanks
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
Check your mouting options in /etc/fstab.
Offline
Well, I'll fiddle around with them, but everything mounts super-fast when I do it manually.
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
You´re using reiserfs on your partitions?
Offline
Reiserfs on all of them, yes.
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
it´s quiet normal. reiserfs takes much longer to mount comparing to ext3 at boot.
Offline
Man, that's really irritating.... no-one's ever informed me of that.
Cheers for clearing that up Andy.
Is there any linux app you know of that will enable me to non-destructively convert a partition from reiserfs to ext3?
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
nop there is no such app
Offline
No, you'll just have to copy your stuff, format, copy it back, and reinstall.
A bit of advice though: if you use ext3, ALWAYS use the dir_index option when making the filesystem, like so:
mke2fs -j -O dir_index /dev/hdXY
With dir_index, ext3 is almost as fast as Reiser4 when dealing with very large directories. Without dir_index, it can be unbearably slow.
(If you don't wish to use ext3, try JFS - it performs similarly to ReiserFS, though pacman searches might take slightly more time. I would not recommend XFS unless you have a very fast hard drive though.)
Offline
if you use ext3, ALWAYS use the dir_index option when making the filesystem
That's VERY useful information GJ, thanks for passing it on.
What's the word on reiser4? It supposed to be as good as it makes itself out to be?
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
What's the word on reiser4? It supposed to be as good as it makes itself out to be?
Right now reiser4 is caught up in heated battle between Hans and the kernel dev team. It seems that Hans thinks reiser4 should be merged just because it's here and the kernel devs think it needs to comply with written coding standards, be easy to maintain.
Personally, I don't care much for reiser4 anymore and prefer to stick with JFS or similar. It doesn't have any great performance improvements of other filesystems that I can tell and it has caused several instances of changes in the reiser4 code post-release causing partitions to be unreadable by newly patched kernels. As Gullible Jones said, ext3 still has some tricks left that most people don't know about and it's been around long enough that most of these things are worked out.
Offline
ext3 still has some tricks left that most people don't know about and it's been around long enough that most of these things are worked out.
I guess you're right Bertus... the excellent speed tip from Gullible makes ext3 a whole lot more appealing
What are the advantages of having a journaling file system? Is it just that, because all changes to be written are queued in a file, if things go wrong then the filesystem can pick up where it left things?
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
Pretty much. With ext2, a power outage can render things unreadable; with ext3, that probably won't happen.
(I speak from experience... That's why I will never, ever make a separate boot partition formatted in ext2.)
Offline
With ext2, a power outage can render things unreadable
Worrying :?
So why would people still use ext2? Are there any advantages to using it?
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
Yes, a journalled filesystem will not fit on a floppy or a very small partition, and there are ways of reading ext2 from Windows... Other than those, there's not really any good reason AFAIK.
Offline
It all makes sense now... ok, cheers for clearing that up GJ
.oO Komodo Dave Oo.
Offline
Pages: 1