[lkml]   [1997]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: performance of vfat versus ext2?
In article <>,
"Marty Leisner" <> wrote:

>For msdos mounts I get:
>Writing the 25 Megabyte file, 'iozone.tmp'...12.990000 seconds
>Reading the file...353.160000 seconds
>IOZONE performance measurements:
> 2018044 bytes/second for writing the file
> 74228 bytes/second for reading the file
>Any hypothesis? I did some performance studies in 1.* and didn't recall seeing

Hm, I have also noticed very low performance when reading from
fat/vfat. For example, midnight commander takes a very long time
(about 10-20 seconds) to read a vfat directory with approx. 110 MB in
1400 files. I don't think, it's midnight commanders fault, because it
is way faster on ext2 partitions. Also, FAT isn't that slow. Norton
Commander (version 1.0 for win) takes about 1 - 2 seconds for the same
job under NT.

And, yes you're right. If I remember correctly, 1.2.x was much faster
on fat/vfat partitions.

BTW: I'am running 2.1.17.
# /AS/ #
# God save the screen ! #

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.016 / U:0.940 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site