[linux-audio-user] is ext3 ok for real-time / low-latency?

[Ross Vandegrift]

On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 11:00:26PM +0000, anton wrote:
> On Saturday 15 February 2003 22:40, Jan \ wrote:
> > I only use reiserfs on my data drive.  I use ext3 on my root drive.  If
> > you're doing any serious recording you need a dedicated data drive.  I
> > *really* wouldn't use reiserfs on the root drive.
> >
> Hm, Now I dont, I learned the hard way as usual...

There's no reason not to.  I've used Reiserfs on my workstation since
last 1999.  The only filesystem I lost in that time was due to my
stupidity (I forgot to apply a VFS fix for the VFS-eats-filesystems bug
that was in 2.4.5.  I knew about the bug, I knew about the patch.  I was
stupid).

ext3 has been shown to have more variance in the latency than other
filesystems.  Perhaps this is an issue for you.

I've used Reiserfs and ext3 on small personal disks, up to many-drived
RAID arrays at work.  I use Reiserfs whenever I'm building the system up
from scratch because it's faster for streaming operations and deletes.
I use ext3 whenever I have to convert a filesystem for journalling
because I don't have to backup and restore.

There's really very little reliability difference between the two.

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
ross at willow.seitz.com

A Pope has a Water Cannon.                               It is a Water Cannon.
He fires Holy-Water from it.                        It is a Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses it.                                 It is a Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses the Hell out of it.          It is a Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He has it pierced.                It is a Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He makes it official.       It is a Canon Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
Batman and Robin arrive.                                       He shoots them.