Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> Why ext2 rather than ext3? >> I think you trimmed that line a bit prematurely in that it went on to >> say "flash drive". ext2 is arguably better than ext3 for flash drives >> because of the reduced number of writes to disk. > > The extra writes of ext3 have 2 consequences: > 1 - slow things down > 2 - wear out the media > > Only point 2 is specific to flash, and it only matters if it will cause > the media to die sooner. With current flash media, obsolescence will > come much sooner than death, so ext3 is just as suited for flash as it > is for magnetic media. > > > Stefan
Very interesting story! does it apply on CF cards? The name says flash, so I would assume yes? But still, I think it really reasonable to consider the life of the media. regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
