From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9fMD-0001CX-O2 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:18:22 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6782D1C025; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:16:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq1.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq1.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.42.164]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4691C025 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:16:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.42.143] (helo=smtp12.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq1.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9fKh-0005rD-Hm for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:16:47 +0200 Received: from 5ed02730.cm-7-1a.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([94.208.39.48] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp12.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9fKf-0004Op-S8 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:16:45 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22F48277F for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:17:05 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xSu+WVFkAi0Q for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:17:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C65811DE1 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:17:04 +0200 (CEST) From: Joost Roeleveld To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: raid1 grub ext4 Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:16:44 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/4.6 beta4 (Linux/2.6.36-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4DA46856.3050308@gmail.com> References: <201104121531.01101.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> <4DA46856.3050308@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <20110412151705.22F48277F@data.antarean.org> X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1Q9fKf-0004Op-S8 X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-0.928, vereist 5, BAYES_00 -1.90, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.98, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.01) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 8179bba319f8536c57e1893cd82e4acc On Tuesday 12 April 2011 09:57:26 Dale wrote: > Peter Humphrey wrote: > > On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:10:52 James wrote: > >> Stroller stellar.eclipse.co.uk> writes: > >>> There's no need for extents on such a small partition, > >>> nor journalling (because you write to /boot so > >>> rarely, the likelihood of a power failure when you're > >>> doing so is minuscule). > >> > >> Yea, sure, but that's not the point. I just wanted to > >> use ext4 for everything. Not on this system, but often, > >> my boot partition is very active, as I copy many kernels > >> there for many different (arch)machines and different hardware > >> (HD, SSD, CF, SD...) I try to make the many systems I admin > >> as homogeneous as possible, hence the switch to ext4 > >> for boot. > > > > Nevertheless, if ext4 isn't working for you you should follow the advice > > you've been given and format /boot as ext2. All my boot partitions are > > ext2, regardless of which others are ext4 or reiserfs. > > Same here. I use ext3 and reiserfs, depending on what it is, but /boot > is always ext2. Why, it works well with grub and has for many many > years and most likely will for many years to come as well. > > As for making things the same, that my not always be a good idea > either. I put some things on reiserfs but some on ext3. It seams each > file system has its strengths and weaknesses. I read that portage, with > a lot of small files, does better on ext* file systems. So I put > portage on that. Most everything else is on reiserfs. Where did you read that portage, with lots of small files, is best on ext*? I was under the impression that reiserfs has better performance with lots of smaller files. -- Joost