29 Jun
2011
29 Jun
'11
1:49 a.m.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [LAU] Best file system for audio?
From: Gabriel M. Beddingfield <gabrbedd(a)gmail.com>
To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org, lists(a)wolfdream.ca
Date: 06/28/2011 05:40 PM
On Monday, June 27, 2011 05:47:13 pm S. Massy wrote:
What type of performance hit
does journalized file systems take?
Does a non-journalized file system give you less latency?
Hello, all,
I know this topic comes up now and again. I'm about to
create a partition for audio work and am wondering
whether any new consensus has been reached over which is
the best file system format for the job. What are you,
fellows using?
Something like this should do you good:
- For hard disk recording... use a NON-journaling
file system like ext2. (E.g. mounted as
/tmp or something.) This removes the overhead
of updating the journal for each transaction
to the disk. If you have a power failure during
a recording, you're pretty fsck'd no matter which
way you go... so the journal won't help you. - For everything else... use a stable, journaling
filesystem. ext4 is very nice, as is ext3.
But things like xfs, reiserfs, jfs, etc... these
are all good choices. I do *not* recommend
btrfs right now. I've encountered too many
problems with it to recommend it as a stable fs.
I think I first encountered this idea from the ardour docs.
-gabriel
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
Christopher Cherrett
ccherrett(a)openoctave.org
http://www.openoctave.org