[PD] (OT) is reading files from an NTFS filesystem in linux 30 times slower than ext4?

András Murányi muranyia at gmail.com
Sat Jun 18 23:27:54 CEST 2011

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 22:45, Matteo Sisti Sette <
matteosistisette at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> After a whole day spent trying to find the bottleneck that makes my patche
> so tremendosly slow to load in Pd under linux, I found out that if I load
> them from the native linux filesystem (an ext4 partition) they load about 30
> times faster than when I load them from my NTFS partition which is where I
> usually keep all my data.
> Outside Pd I had never noticed an abnormal slowness in reading data from
> that disk, and though I did expect NTFS to be slower in linux I am surprised
> the difference can be so huge. Is it so, or may there be some issue specific
> to Pd?

Yes, ext4 is relatively new, modern, and benchmarks prove it to be fast.
NTFS is not so slow when used with Windows (7) but the linux ntfs-3g driver
is a lazy one. The ntfs (no 3g) driver is faster but it's read only.

The other problem with ntfs-3g is that it seems to me that sometimes it
corrupts the filesystem in a way that Windows (XP) has problems using it
("Delayed write failed" errors).

Also, some filesystems are less, some are more CPU-intensive so they work
slower when the CPU is busy with other things, but in this case, I think,
it's not about the CPU.

BTW, thanks for pulling my attention to this, now ext4 is mature enough that
I migrate from xfs...!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20110618/f3aeaaa9/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list