News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting.

Re:Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting by Travis on Thursday May 31, 2012 @05:21PM (#4050443)
Does this imply for certain contexts, the Windows model is superior?

Say you had a "write/update infrequently, read many times" system profile with 10% disk space avail. It seems like Windows would store these files closer to each other on the drive, making reads more efficient.

Or would that be such a negligible difference that it's not worth mentioning?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting by gouranga on Thursday May 31, 2012 @05:42PM (#4050541)
It's pretty negligible. I genuinely can't tell the difference between NTFS and ext3 at least performance-wise.

However, the locking semantics on NTFS are shitty unless you know what you are doing (i.e. use KTM/Transactional NTFS) which sometimes skews the statistics a lot.

[ Parent | on HN ]