reiserfs vs. ext3

BiggJ · Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2003 4:50 am Post subject: reiserfs vs. ext3

What's the difference between "reiserfs" and ext3? I have always used ext3.

--J

Halanegri · Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2003 4:51 am Post subject:

ReiserFS is much faster at handling very small files, so if /usr/portage is on ReiserFS, portage well be a little snappier, especially when updating the portage cache after "emerge sync".

tojo · n00b Joined: 09 Dec 2002 Posts: 72

Ext3 is too noisy for some harddrives (at least for mine)

I just whitched to ReiserFS and it is so quiet and fast!

btw. my harddrive is maxtor 160gb with 8mb cache.

nbensa · Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2003 6:05 am Post subject:

Stu_28 · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 12 Jun 2003 Posts: 129

If you want a fairly in-depth look at ext3 and reiserfs, you should take a look at the series of articles Daniel Robbins wrote over at IBM's developerWorks ( http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/views/linux/articles.jsp ) titled "Common threads: Advanced filesystem implementor's guide", it's a 13 part article that covers--if I recall correctly--reiserfs, ext3, jfs, xfs, devfs, evms, and a couple others. It's a good read.

pilla · Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2003 6:45 pm Post subject:

See the filesystem choice thread
Moved from IG
_________________
"I'm just very selective about the reality I choose to accept." -- Calvin