Daniel Iliev schrieb: > On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:46:01 +0200 > Alan McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> On Friday 28 November 2008 13:14:42 Dale wrote: >> >>> If this is a little high, what would be the best way to defrag it? >>> >> By not defragging it. >> > > I beg to defer. The simplest way to defrag a partition is to make > backup and restore. If it's worth the effort is another story. > > >> It's not Windows. Windows boxes needs defragging not because >> fragmentation is a huge problem in itself, but because windows >> filesystems are a steaming mess of [EMAIL PROTECTED] that do little right >> and most >> things wrong. Defrag treats the symptom, not the cause :-) >> >> > > Personally I think NTFS is one of the things MS have done right. It is > fast, stable and has the features of the Linux FSes and even more. It > has journal, quotas, permissions, mount points, symbolic links. Does > any of ext, reiserfs or xfs have compression and/or encryption > capabilities? I don't think so. > I have some experience with MS Windows and I've never seen data > corruption after a system crash or power loss, a thing I can't say > about ReiserFS or ext3 (when not mounted with data=journal). > > > <SNIP>
My experience with NTFS is somewhat more balanced (maybe). In about 12 years I experienced one damaged NTFS instance. This was caused by a crash during an installation (don't remember what we installed - it's been about 9 years ago :-) BUT this was an example of total destruction and mayhem -- absolutely irreparable. After about 120 errors (filenames with very much foreign sounding names - high bit turned on) we gave up and reinstalled everything. Probably the MFT was damaged beyond repair. So my conclusion --- NTFS is not so easy to damage, but if you manage it, you're toast :-/ Ciao, Wolfgang Liebich
