On Sunday 08 November 2009 04:46:50 William Kenworthy wrote: > On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> > BTW is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better > > ? -- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines. > > Have you tried fsk on it? - "man e2fsck" > > The last question is a bit of a "how long is a piece of string" > question. > > My personal experience is ext2 is only for those occasions you dont > value the data at all :) > > ext3 isnt much better unless you use "data=journal" to get some basic > protection. That turns on the journal which will wear out an SSD in short order, so ext2 is indeed the better file system > But instead of fiddling with such (deleted disparaging comment) file > systems, use reiserfs though this may need a complete reinstall . > Updates are still occuring to the reiserfs code in the kernel, so > reiserfs is not abandoned by any means. I use reiser everywhere else but not on my netbook. Have you used it on an SSD and if so, what results did you get > ext4, reiserfs4, btfs and the like are too new for me, though I like the > look of btfs. All conventional filesystems are built in such a way as to suit rotating disk media. Not surprising, as those were the only disks available for many a year. SSDs however, are very different, especially the cheap nasty controllers that go into netbooks. I think one should be willing to experiment with those, see what comes up. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
