[tlug] Re: dualboot WinXP/Linux

[Tobias Diedrich <ranma@example.com>]

Jonathan Byrne wrote:

> WRT performance, I don't know whether NTFS is faster or slower than FAT32,
> but you may have noticed that if you have unscheduled downtime (on Windows!
> Never! I can't believe it! :-) that a system with NTFS just picks up where
> you left off, whereas a FAT system has to do the Windows equivalent
> of an fsck to verify filesystem integrity.  This is because NTFS is
> a journaling filesystem.

Also, FAT is a badly designed filesystem that is very suspectible to
fragmentation, wastes a lot of space on its linked list file allocation
table, which is also a single point of failure (corrupt one FAT sector
and you get a big dataloss). And the long filename support is a big kludge
on the low level as FAT was never meant to be extensible.

-- 
Tobias						PGP: http://9ac7e0bc.2ya.com
This mail is made of 100% recycled bits

Attachment: pgp00029.pgp
Description: PGP signature