Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 21:06:22 01/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 09, 2001 at 20:56:17, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >On January 09, 2001 at 19:12:23, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On January 09, 2001 at 19:08:43, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >> >>>On January 09, 2001 at 18:49:06, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>Hello, >>>> >>>>For partitions under NT2000 i can chose out of 2 >>>>different formats: either NTFS or FAT32, >>>> >>>>I don't know exactly how the file systems internally work, >>>>but i wonder about next >>>> a) what is the difference between the 2 >>>> b) what is the fastest file system to read and write huge >>>> files (several gigabytes: about 2.5 gigabyte) with? >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>>Vincent >>> >>>FAT32 is faster than NTFS, but NTFS is much more robust. I'd recommend NTFS >>>despite it relative slowness. >> >>If you boost the cluster size for NTFS aren't they about the same? > >No. I believe (and that's from my memory, so of course I can be wrong) that when >you are writing something to NTFS disk OS is doing something to protect the >metadata, i.e. either writing it to disk immediately, or writing the transaction >into the transaction log on the disk, or doing something similar. That means >that it's much harder to totally lose the information in the case of power or >some other failure, but also means that all the writes are much slower than for >the FAT[32] case. > >All journal/logging file systems have that speed disadvantage, not only NTFS. It is possible to turn all the I/O logging off under Win2k though, isn't it? I believe I read this somewhere, and there was a registry patch that supposedly did this, but I still don't know quite enough about the internal workings of the OS to know whether it did anything.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.