[mythtv-users] Hard disk performance

[Alex Tomlins]

On 02/12/10 20:32, aaron wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 15:18, Craig Van Tassle<craig at codestorm.org>  wrote:
>    
>>
>> Also with ext3, you will start to see slower access and read times as your
>> files get larger and your drive fills up. I found that with my Raid array,
>> and other systems using the same size of drives.
>>      
> I have been a big fan of XFS ever since SGI made the first public code
> drop way back. I was frustrated with the length of time it took for
> ext2 to recover after a system crash/hang, and the periodic forced
> fsck during bootup. For those reasons I skipped over ext3 entirely and
> haven't heard many good things about its performance.
>
> But recently I've tried ext4 and I am reasonably impressed with the
> performance. I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on my laptop and used XFS. I
> figured that Ubuntu had abandoned the "30 second bootup" that they
> were so proud of in the past... until I hosed my system and
> reinstalled and decided to try ext4.... and wow, the system boots
> really fast, and overall the performance does feel faster than with
> XFS (much to my amazement)
>
> Ext4 still has the very frustrating forced fsck every so often, though
> (I'm not sure what the default setting is... I think maybe every 20
> mounts?).
>
> (I was sold on moving everything to ext4 right up until the first time
> my Ubuntu system did its forced fsck ... not really something I want
> happening on a Myth box that wakes itself up right before recordings
> start...)
>
> aaron
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>    
Have a look at tune2fs (part of the standard ext2 toolset).  It will let 
you set things like how often a full fsck is run, and even disable the 
automatic fsck runs.

Alex

-- 
Alex Tomlins
Email/Jabber: alex at tomlins.org.uk

There are two kinds of people in the world: those who finish what they started