| 1 |
Florian Philipp wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 25.12.2012 16:41, schrieb Mark Knecht: |
| 3 |
>> Hi, |
| 4 |
>> Merry Christmas to all. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> Upgrading an external USB2 drive at home this Christmas morning to |
| 7 |
>> 1TB for more video storage space. One large partition, non-raid, files |
| 8 |
>> are around 1GB. The drive holds only static video files that get |
| 9 |
>> written once and don't change or get erased. No MythTV stuff or |
| 10 |
>> anything like that. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> This disk reside on my main desktop machine and gets backed up |
| 13 |
>> every couple of days to another USB2 drive (FAT formatted |
| 14 |
>> unfortunately) which attaches to the TV. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> With the previous local drive I used ext3 and have had no problems. |
| 17 |
>> I'm just wondering if there's a better choice & why. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Cheers, |
| 20 |
>> Mark |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
> Ext4 offers better performance for large files. This is especially |
| 23 |
> notable when you remove them but other operations are faster, too. XFS |
| 24 |
> would be the traditional large-file choice but since the arrival of |
| 25 |
> Ext4, I don't see a point in putting up with its quirks anymore. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Regards, |
| 28 |
> Florian Philipp |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
For those who keep up with my adventures, I use ext4 for my home |
| 33 |
directory which has a LOT of videos. Some videos are small and some are |
| 34 |
large but I can say this, it is really fast. No fragmentation either. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I also use ext4 for my backup drive. I accidentally deleted some stuff |
| 37 |
one day and I can say this, it is VERY fast. I'm just glad it was only |
| 38 |
a backup. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I would second the idea for ext4. It works great for me. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Dale |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
:-) :-) |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! |
Archives