| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:15 pm Post subject: Portage on reiserfs? |
 |
|
| Is it worth placing a portage tree on a reiserfs partition? Are there any counterindications of doing so? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hardcore
l33t
Joined: 01 Nov 2003
Posts: 626
Location: MSU, MI
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:32 pm Post subject: Re: Portage on reiserfs? |
|
|
| zieloo wrote: | | Is it worth placing a portage tree on a reiserfs partition? Are there any counterindications of doing so? |
Reiserfs works well with lots of small files (portage). I've used reiserfs as my fs for /usr/portage a few years now, and have no complaints.
_________________
Nothing can stop me now, cuz I just don't care. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's what I was waiting for!
What about the speed? Meaning searching sth or performing whatever operations on portage ebuilds - how fast is that exactly comparing to ext3?
Anyone made such a comparison? I would be grateful if you could post some numbers... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bol_
n00b
Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 8
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I use reiserfs, and have used it for a couple of years, and i just works fine.
But, i'm interested in som comparements against ext3 too.
I know that reiserfs is faster with small files (^4kb) on the paper, but have anyone done some real benchmarks on that?
I wondering if ext3 is faster than reiser on big files, such as video and audio? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bol_ wrote: | I use reiserfs, and have used it for a couple of years, and i just works fine.
But, i'm interested in som comparements against ext3 too.
I know that reiserfs is faster with small files (^4kb) on the paper, but have anyone done some real benchmarks on that?
I wondering if ext3 is faster than reiser on big files, such as video and audio? |
Yeap - would be good to know that... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COiN3D
Guru
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 543
Location: Munich, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
I just wanted to say that this benchmark here shows that ext3 is the slowest filesystem of all. 
_________________
e17 documentation | Be free and use Jabber as your IM! | Combine IRC and IM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, but I was thinking of doing sth like this:
emerge sync when portage is on reiserfs and then when it's on ext3 for instance, compare then result. It's said reiserfs is a few times faster, but could anyone prove this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prymitive
Apprentice
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 260
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zieloo wrote: | That's what I was waiting for!
What about the speed? Meaning searching sth or performing whatever operations on portage ebuilds - how fast is that exactly comparing to ext3?
Anyone made such a comparison? I would be grateful if you could post some numbers... |
If You want to have veeeery fast emerge sync's then You should go for reiser4, portage tree is real fast on this filesystem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dfy
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My syncs are faster on reiser3.6 than on reiser4. I run reiser3.6 on my whole / now (after 2 months of reiser4), and I'm very happy with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COiN3D
Guru
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 543
Location: Munich, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nevertheless, the fastest way of syncing the portage is when you load /usr/portage in your ram 
_________________
e17 documentation | Be free and use Jabber as your IM! | Combine IRC and IM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dfy wrote: |
My syncs are faster on reiser3.6 than on reiser4. I run reiser3.6 on my whole / now (after 2 months of reiser4), and I'm very happy with it.
|
How much faster would you say? I think I'll not get reiserfs4 - sth stable and tested would be better for the beginning...
One more thing: did you have any complications setting up rfs? (I will look for some more info anyway, but would like to know your general opinion). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
