From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFC71381FB for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 17:58:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9F3FF21C005; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 17:58:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ye0-f178.google.com (mail-ye0-f178.google.com [209.85.213.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60A8721C0BC for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 17:56:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ye0-f178.google.com with SMTP id q10so1345374yen.9 for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 09:56:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=F68nhR/pSMrbCMn1/eM0p/Y2pqgisSSNBb3JlYxekeQ=; b=PWnkW9WfRAAij4ZyaFbXi8MAh20EXqv/4d6x6ZUHOtX/31Wxv9sNbQ2Zqnmn8iVyw2 7FLsGiv7mzlakYhj4oPXDaG5RQltPnXv+GF637+HfRjRr7U3nZGLsIDSL1HxGcghjYJ1 +Z5UQYuEYGgY2i+TUm/hsW+lMHZU1aL1Jm68dKdlBeSARhTdzf2DONhTiZAlsN/PVreg rJm5cloSlKlZQHTDvnF30VavOoqbYAEu/FTuMWFj3FC8NP67jZQ8KqNqFsti3szinb1u v2WHwyZGWUJBp2Ol+jGY7FLRjASMr+BRUQapLO4BAEqjY8N+GQAJ093ccpgzS1L8w1R0 UsSg== X-Received: by 10.236.121.207 with SMTP id r55mr19061372yhh.75.1356458195555; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 09:56:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-94-18.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.94.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f14sm19562491anl.0.2012.12.25.09.56.34 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 25 Dec 2012 09:56:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50D9E8D1.9030301@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 11:56:33 -0600 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/17.0 SeaMonkey/2.14.1 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Good/better/best filesystem for large, static video library? References: <50D9DFE4.3020009@orlitzky.com> In-Reply-To: <50D9DFE4.3020009@orlitzky.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: be53f383-d47d-4e5d-9072-a922b260bd92 X-Archives-Hash: 0df6f1bf2c6d1c09bdc89aeca6a5e549 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 12/25/2012 12:07 PM, Mark Knecht wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote: >>> On Dec 25, 2012 10:44 PM, "Mark Knecht" wrote: >> >>>> With the previous local drive I used ext3 and have had no problems. >>>> I'm just wondering if there's a better choice & why. >> >>> For your usage, I think ext3 is the most suitable. >>> >>> Do you have another fs in mind? >> Really, no. ext3 has been fine. I didn't see any real advantage to >> ext4 myself. Florian offers the removal argument but I've never >> removed files from this database. It's just movies so the systems just >> grows over time. >> >> I suppose I wondered whether some other filesystem might get through >> an fsck _much_ faster. >> > There's really no reason to use ext3 over ext4. Ext4 does have a faster > fsck. > > > I have noticed the fsck is fast here too, faster than reiserfs anyway. It seems ext4 is pretty fast with everything, at least in my eye. I also found that ext4 has a defrag tool. It rarely finds any fragments but at least it is available. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!