Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:43:47 +0100 From: simond@irrelevant.org To: Lamont Granquist <lamont@scriptkiddie.org> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fat32 slower than dogshit? Message-ID: <20010512074346.B18681@irrelevant.org> In-Reply-To: <20010511151056.J15049-100000@warez.scriptkiddie.org>; from lamont@scriptkiddie.org on Fri, May 11, 2001 at 03:19:21PM -0700 References: <061901c0da66$8da39040$931576d8@inethouston.net> <20010511151056.J15049-100000@warez.scriptkiddie.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 03:19:21PM -0700, Lamont Granquist wrote: > > Well, i think it is, i'm actually not too sure exactly how fast dogshit is > in the first place. But in doing a simple untar on a fat32 partition > using both 4-stable a couple days after release and a recently updated > 4-stable as of yesterday (5/10) it goes about 20-30 times slower than an > untar on a UFS partition. Now i know fat32 is supposed to be slower than > UFS, but this seems a little bit rediculous. Does this sound like a known > problem? If someone wants more information I can probably dig down and > get it if I know what you want... I noticed that the msdos filesystem got very slow myself a while back, for me turning the write cache (ata(4)) back on helped speed things back up again, it's not the ideal solution, but it worked for me. -- Simon Dick simond@irrelevant.org "Why do I get this urge to go bowling everytime I see Tux?" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010512074346.B18681>