Hosting Provided By

Re: Why ext3 doesn't need defragmentation ?

From: David Brodbeck <brodbd(at)u.washington.edu>
Date: Fri Nov 30 2007 - 16:21:18 EST

On Nov 30, 2007, at 9:45 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> No. The NTFS file system does not need defragmentation.
> The best explanation I've heard of why they have a defragmenter for it
> is that it was considered easier to write a defragmenter than to go
> about explaining that FAT32 just sucks.

Are you sure about that? I've seen some really heavily fragmented NTFS filesystems. Or are you saying that fragmentation doesn't affect NTFS's performance?

Microsoft didn't provide a defragmenter for NTFS until Windows 2000 -- on NT4 and earlier they suggested you buy a third-party utility.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Received on Fri Nov 30 17:33:58 2007

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Owen Heisler: "Re: please help about etch"
Previous message: Bob Goldberg: "LDAP - howto get linux to talk to exchange/AD"
In reply to: Stefan Monnier: "Re: Why ext3 doesn't need defragmentation ?"
Next in thread: Alvin Oga: "Re: Why ext3 doesn't need defragmentation ?"
Reply: Alvin Oga: "Re: Why ext3 doesn't need defragmentation ?"
Reply: Stefan Monnier: "Re: Why ext3 doesn't need defragmentation ?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ] [ By messages with attachments ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 26 2008 - 13:07:28 EST