1 |
On Friday 02 April 2010 16:28:43 Dale wrote: |
2 |
> Neil Bothwick wrote: |
3 |
> > On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:09:30 +0200, meino.cramer@×××.de wrote: |
4 |
> >> Then: I often transer videos from my DVB-T-receiver/recorder |
5 |
to my |
6 |
> >> harddisk to cut out the advertising and to transcode the |
7 |
videos to |
8 |
> >> somethings better than "ts" (transport streams), |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > These tend to be bigger, often in the GB range, so I'd use a |
11 |
separate |
12 |
> > filesystem for them with XFS, which handles large files |
13 |
better in my |
14 |
> > experience. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> He mentioned in one of the first few posts that he regularly |
17 |
has hard |
18 |
> shutdowns. I took that as pulling the plug. The last bit of |
19 |
experience |
20 |
> I had with XFS, it does not like that sort of thing to happen. |
21 |
Each |
22 |
> time I had a hard shutdown, I had to reinstall the OS. Has XFS |
23 |
changed |
24 |
> so that power loss is not s problem or should he not use this |
25 |
after all? |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Would hate for the OP to use XFS if it has not improved in that |
28 |
area. |
29 |
|
30 |
XFS was ropey in its early days. I had to re-install a partition |
31 |
once too (on a laptop!). It is much more stable now (have not |
32 |
had a problem in the last 4+ years). |
33 |
|
34 |
reiserfs is absolutely bullet proof here, with hundreds of |
35 |
crashes on a machine that had bad memory (like twice or three |
36 |
times a day I would have to pull the plug, for months on end |
37 |
until I isolated the error on a memory module). |
38 |
|
39 |
reiser4 seems to be on a class of its own in terms of |
40 |
performance. Perhaps not as forgiving on hard crashes as the |
41 |
reiserfs? Not sure. It's early days yet on this machine, but I |
42 |
have only praises for it so far. I just hope they incorporate it |
43 |
in the kernel so that I don't have to manually patch it every |
44 |
time. |
45 |
|
46 |
This is just my 2c's - so YMMV. |
47 |
-- |
48 |
Regards, |
49 |
Mick |