|
|
Disk Journaling
It will slow down file access (read/write) somewhat, but I have no data on how much. It probably really depends on the computer setup.
Disk Journaling
I'm not an expert on this by any stretch of the imagination, but my impression is that journalled filesystems are shouldn't be that hard on system. They - in principle - should only tie up some RAM (for the tables they use), and soak up a little background CPU to write contents back to disk when CPU is available. There should be little effect on reading performance. How go the system is at balancing tasks might come in play, too. But none of this should be a bg hit on a well-configured system. There will be a little overhead - there is another system service running - but it shouldn't be dramatic.
Disk Journaling
According to Apple, the performance hit is significant. OS X Server (which offers journaling as a standard feature) has been tweaked to reduce this hit; however, OS X standard hasn't. I have a feeling that OS X standard will eventually offer journaling as a standard feature, and by that time OS X will have been tweaked to minimize this performance hit.
Disk Journaling
I'm sorry, but I must say that I disagree. I have used journaling file systems on BeOS, Linux (ext3, reiserfs, etc), and the journaling has in no way slowed down the system, or caused any sort of hit in system performance. While I am not saying that Apple's has issues, or that the slowdown is something that will be worked out as things mature, I do know that journaling should not cause a performance hit <when properly implemented>. |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:HintsNo new hintsComments last 2 daysLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.06 seconds |
|