2011-01-10, 16:57
Hello folks,
I just received my OCZ Vertex 2 40GB SSD to be used in my ION based htpc.
Since i have to recreate partitions anyway and copy the contents rather than image the whole thing i was thinking about the best filesystem choice.
I am running Arch Linux x86_64
I will be going to use GPT partition tables.
Currently i am using ext4 which seems to be an ok choice when using the notail and cleanup flag. I will not store any media itself on the box, all the media files are attached via nfs.
But instead of going for the should-be-ok choice i was wondering wether someone could give me some realworld advice.
I was having a look at
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=ar...lfs2&num=2
which revealed ext4 as being slow when doing sqlite inserts, but then again, the way i see it select performance would be much more interesting since i am rarely doing massive inserts due to the scanning process being slowed down by downloading media info anyway. xfs was even worse when doing inserts.
unfortunately xfs was faster when it came to random reading of data which is crucial as well when loading all those nifty covers and fanart
Another question with these benchmarks, how can they be adapted to a rather slow cpu like the atom?
When reading through these forums it seems a few people went for the dead-prison-horse reiserfs.
But back to my initial question:
ext4 or xfs? btrfs seems to be a no-go and reiser... i don't think so....
Anyone have some real world impressions which could ease my decision?
On a somewhat related note: any hints on the best suited scheduler and swapiness levels when running on ssd?
I just received my OCZ Vertex 2 40GB SSD to be used in my ION based htpc.
Since i have to recreate partitions anyway and copy the contents rather than image the whole thing i was thinking about the best filesystem choice.
I am running Arch Linux x86_64
I will be going to use GPT partition tables.
Currently i am using ext4 which seems to be an ok choice when using the notail and cleanup flag. I will not store any media itself on the box, all the media files are attached via nfs.
But instead of going for the should-be-ok choice i was wondering wether someone could give me some realworld advice.
I was having a look at
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=ar...lfs2&num=2
which revealed ext4 as being slow when doing sqlite inserts, but then again, the way i see it select performance would be much more interesting since i am rarely doing massive inserts due to the scanning process being slowed down by downloading media info anyway. xfs was even worse when doing inserts.
unfortunately xfs was faster when it came to random reading of data which is crucial as well when loading all those nifty covers and fanart
Another question with these benchmarks, how can they be adapted to a rather slow cpu like the atom?
When reading through these forums it seems a few people went for the dead-prison-horse reiserfs.
But back to my initial question:
ext4 or xfs? btrfs seems to be a no-go and reiser... i don't think so....
Anyone have some real world impressions which could ease my decision?
On a somewhat related note: any hints on the best suited scheduler and swapiness levels when running on ssd?
). Actually my xbmc live (over ubuntu 10.10 server), after BIOS post, is up & running in 
and 
... even without boosting in term of reading speed like you correctly say 