Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 143

Thread: Tuxera Claims NTFS Is The Fastest File-System For Linux

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,705

    Default Tuxera Claims NTFS Is The Fastest File-System For Linux

    Phoronix: Tuxera Claims NTFS Is The Fastest File-System For Linux

    Coincidently there's some more file-system news after just writing about the EXT4 and Btrfs file-systems with the Linux 3.0 kernel. A Phoronix reader has pointed out that a developer at Tuxera is claiming their proprietary NTFS Linux kernel driver makes the Microsoft file-system the fastest choice under Linux. Reportedly this kernel driver that implements Microsoft NTFS support is about twice as fast as EXT4, the main Linux file-system of choice right now...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTU5Ng

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    495

    Default

    This person should really make a ext4 driver with those algorithms that speed stuff up.

    It's not NTFS that's faster, it's a driver that's faster because of some algorithm.

    Maybe (because I'm not familiar with filesystems) it doesn't even matter that much and ext4 driver with those features beats that ntfs driver again.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    343

    Default

    nice but how it will affect us? non windows users?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4

    Default Faster at doing what?

    I doubt NTFS is faster at everything while providing the same features as EXT4, XFS and Btrfs so bring on the benchmarks and show us!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    734

    Default What about

    Tuxera-NTFS on Linux vs MS-NTFS on Win7?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,673

    Default

    Indeed, I'd rather have a file system that is slower but doesn't eat your data for lunch. And yea, it seems that it's an algorithm that does that, although it could be specific to NTFS.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default

    A couple points.

    1. This is probably on an unfragmented filesystem. Given NTFS's tendency to fragment, this performance would never happen in the real world.

    2. NTFS doesn't have all that extra security code it needs to run. "Permissions? What's that?"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pvtcupcakes View Post
    A couple points.

    1. This is probably on an unfragmented filesystem. Given NTFS's tendency to fragment, this performance would never happen in the real world.

    2. NTFS doesn't have all that extra security code it needs to run. "Permissions? What's that?"
    Uhh, you apparently know nothing about NTFS. NTFS is all about security. It has a more complex permission system than the Unix standard, with more than just read/write/execute, but 7 or 8 different permission types and it is all done via cascading ACLs, rather than the simplistic owner/group/everybody model. As a result, permission checking is slower and more complicated than on standard Unix. There is also per-file encryption and compression, which can further slow things down (if used).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    "proprietary NTFS Linux kernel driver "

    do i use a free and opensource system to install an proprietary file system??? LOOL!

    i also use the radeon driver and not the catalyst.... those people should just shut up no one care about proprietary file system drivers...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siride View Post
    Uhh, you apparently know nothing about NTFS. NTFS is all about security. It has a more complex permission system than the Unix standard, with more than just read/write/execute, but 7 or 8 different permission types and it is all done via cascading ACLs, rather than the simplistic owner/group/everybody model. As a result, permission checking is slower and more complicated than on standard Unix. There is also per-file encryption and compression, which can further slow things down (if used).
    Interesting. So the filesystem has a bunch of security features that a standard home user install of Windows will never use. If everybody is running an Admin account, then what's the point of permissions.

    Maybe these features are actually used in an enterprise environment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •