Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > This is a little OT, but how well do XFS and reiserfs work with > laptops? I am under the impression that reiserFS does not have good > spin-down times, even when mounted with noatime and noflushd running. > As I understand it, reiserFS bypasses the kernels delayed-write > system, so noflushd has no effect. > the other problem with ReiserFS is the CPU overhead which on a desktop makes no difference. On a laptop it means less battery life.
> XFS does this too, I think,
> although I haven't tried it. Do any of you notice this when you run
> these filesystems, or is there a way to fix it? Right now I am just
> using ext3 on my laptop, but I have XFS on my desktop and am really
> happy with it. It 'feels' a lot faster.
>
XFS definately feels faster, well it did when I upgraded to XFS from ext2,
and now its but a distant memory, until 2.4.12 came out then another jump
occured, something to do with the vm replacement I think :)
XFS spins down the harddisk easily, when the laptop is doing nothing it does
stay spun down.....I haven't tried it with noflushd but one day I will get
around to it :)
Alex
--
____________________________________
/ Some of us are becoming the men we \
| wanted to marry. |
| |
\ -- Gloria Steinem /
------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
pgpFsPIj5SltO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
