26 Jun
2007
26 Jun
'07
6:39 a.m.
Mark Knecht wrote:
If I was going to make the choice you suggest I'd
likely go for ext2
as requires slightly less work for the system than carrying the
overhead of doing the ext3 stuff and I figure that I would never know
when I'm going to run out of compute cycles.
I'd seriously advise against that, if you don't absolutely have to.
You only need one occasion with a power failure or complete X lockup
(hard reset the only thing that works) to make ext3 worth your while
(or any journalling filesystem, for that matter). If you need more
speed, I'd do yourself a favour and get a second drive, software
raid-0 or raid-5 is easy to configure and allows for huge write
speeds. You do need to make sure that you move the data off the raid
0 array after your done, if you want more reliability for long-term
storage.
I believe it's even possible to make 2 partitions on each drive, and
configure a raid-0 array with the first set and a raid-1 array with
the second set. I haven't tried this out for performance-testing, but
it should work. If you make the raid-0 big enough for typical
recording, you can move the data to the raid-1 after your done.
Regards,
Hein Zelle
--
Unix is user friendly. It's just very particular about who
it's friends are.
Hein Zelle hein(a)icce.rug.nl
http://www.icce.rug.nl/~hein