ntfs-3g vs. ext2ifs
meng-R6A+fiHC8nRWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org
Sun Jul 26 01:48:53 UTC 2009
From: Tyler Aviss tjaviss-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:59:08 -0400
To: tlug-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [TLUG]: ntfs-3g vs. ext2ifs
> EXT2fs on windows is OK,with the odd permissions quirk.
> Functionality-wise, NTFS-3g on Linux is good, but I've noticed that
> running the NTFS-3G/fuse layer actually consumes a noticeably large
> amount of CPU on older machines, so performance-wise not so good (I
> think it may be a general FUSE thing due to the userland component).
I haven't noticed any permissions quirks with ext2ifs but then I've used it only once to see if it worked :-)
I been using ntfs-3g but did not notice any overhead but then I wasn't looking.
I'll check using top and see.
Thanks again for the heads up.
The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
More information about the Legacy