[NTLUG:Discuss] [Bulk] Re: ext3 waste disk spaces then Windows ME?

[Leroy Tennison]

Pat Regan wrote:
> m m wrote:
>   
>> All:
>>
>> I just found this:
>>
>> " ... Ext3 has the worst inital capacity (92.77%), while others FS preserve 
>> almost full partition capacity (ReiserFS = 99.83%, JFS = 99.82%, XFS = 
>> 99.95%). Interestingly, the residual capacity of Ext3 and ReiserFS was 
>> identical to the initial, while JFS and XFS lost about 0.02% of their 
>> partition capacity, suggesting that these FS can dynamically grow but do not 
>> completely return to their inital state (and size) after file removal."
>>
>> from
>>
>> http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/6396
>>
>> According to the article abovem it seems that the XFS is "better" than ext3.
>> ext3 must be good at some points, otherwise why the most distro use it?
>> Anyone have the idea?
>>
>>     
>
> Somebody needs to tell the author of that article about the fact that
> mke2fs reserves 5% of the filesystem for root by default.  That would
> bring your number for ext2 up to almost 98%.
>
> 5% was a very reasonable amount of space to set aside 10+ year ago.
> Today, it can be a huge waste of space.
>
> Pat
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://ntlug.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>   
This seems like as good a time as any to ask "Does anyone have a 
comparison of file systems?"  What are the good and bad points of each?