Does Your SSD's File System Affect Performance?

Status
Not open for further replies.

aicom

Honorable
Mar 29, 2012
923
0
11,160
54
[citation][nom]hmp_goose[/nom][misses HPFS][wonders what sectors per cluster means to an SSD][/citation]

NTFS was heavily based on HPFS (when MS and IBM were both working on OS/2). It even shares the same MBR partition type code.
 

billafu

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2008
8
0
18,510
0
Enjoyed the article. Sadly, I am still unable to justify spending nearly a dollar per gigabyte for an SSD when HDDs are less than a dime per gig. Maybe when that price difference is a little bit closer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]billafu[/nom]Enjoyed the article. Sadly, I am still unable to justify spending nearly a dollar per gigabyte for an SSD when HDDs are less than a dime per gig. Maybe when that price difference is a little bit closer.[/citation]
120gb for a 120$ and HUGE performance increase and you still complain? How about you get a job.
 

Badelhas

Distinguished
Oct 4, 2011
120
0
18,690
2
[citation][nom]doctorpink[/nom]120gb for a 120$ and HUGE performance increase and you still complain? How about you get a job.[/citation]
Mega LOL!
 

ojas

Distinguished
Feb 25, 2011
2,924
0
20,810
15
[citation][nom]lostmyclan[/nom]toms is partner of micosoft I want some linux test =) 2012 and nothing about linux ?[/citation]
I wonder what it means when they say
For this piece, we're going to go into more depth on file systems with a focus specifically on Windows users, since our rigs in Germany are all Windows-based.
 

AndrewJacksonZA

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2011
466
3
18,785
0
Thanks for the article. It answered some questions that I'd been pondering for a while. I'm a bit disappointed that you missed ReFS which has debuted in Windows 8/Server 8 - even though the OSes are still in beta.

And ext3/ext4. And yes, I read that your German labs are Windows based, but still, it would've been nice. How many enthusiasts and admins that read this use ext3/4 is another question. :)

Thanks.
 

trumpeter1994

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
311
0
10,810
8
[citation][nom]Marthisdil[/nom]Hardly no one uses Linux in a home environment, thus, ext4 and linux whiners need to stop.[/citation]
I don't run linux, but since it has such a dominant presence in the servers you connect to every day...... yes it is relevant
 

haplo602

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2007
202
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]I wonder what it means when they say[/citation]

that means they don't have enough competence to burn a live cd distro (f.e. PTS or ffs Ubuntu) and try ...

come on, NTFS is a dinosaur filesystem ....
 
G

Guest

Guest
I think these tests could also include popular Linux filesystems, such as ext4 and BTRFS, as they seem to have some optimizations for SSD-based drives... from some tests (you can find them on Phoronix), they swiftly beat NTFS/FAT filesystems...
 

Vatharian

Distinguished
May 22, 2009
90
0
18,630
0
Most of MLC-based SSDs around are used as a boot drive. On Windows there is completely no choice on which FS to install on. FAT32 is too dangerous, since it offers no protection/detection of corrupt writes. So for casual windows users article holds no meaning. People who use SSD for workstation based work, eg. video processing or databases are forced to use NTFS, because FAT32 can't handle 4GB+ files and exFAT holds no protection, since there are very little repair/recovery tools for it (especially freeware ones). Also portability suffers. Mac users are pretty much forced to use HFS+. For other uses, non-raided ones, data serving can be done on ext4 or xfs, and I think the last one would need to be thrown in, following optional ext4. Other question is how OS handles the FS. I'd want to see HFS+ partition mounted under Windows and NTFS mounted on Mac (ntfs-3g works!). I even use linux installed on same ntfs volume as my Win7). About WinRE - does all the benchmarking tools work with it? And last, but not least - what about testing these drives in raw mode and comparing this to overhead thrown in by FS?
 

gwolfman

Distinguished
Jan 31, 2007
782
0
18,980
0
You should have thrown a mechanical HDD in there as well since it's obvious that different file systems perform differently (obvious to me, maybe not to all readers). Having the mechanical HDD would help determine whether it's a filesystem nuance or a special case with the combination of filesystem + SSD performance. Otherwise this article seems a bit superficial.
 

tului

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2010
193
0
18,680
0
I suppose for the masses and even myself as little as a few years ago this was a valid question. To me now this seems like asking does the driving surface and type of road impact the speed of your new Supercar. Interstate, highway, cross town, even sand and mud tested.

Still glad to see the article, it made me chuckle thinking about it in my head just now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS