this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
262 points (96.5% liked)
linuxmemes
21393 readers
1890 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry will not be tolerated.
- These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudoin Windows. - No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Interesting to see how many features NTFS does support
That’s why it’s still being used. Not a major reason to move on for MS.
Sad to see APFS not on the list (I know why, just wanted to compare).
Not sure if it's gotten better in the last few years, but it's also incredibly slow. Like orders of magnitude slower than ext3 or HFS.
I’ve never thought of APFS as slow. Didn’t realize it was.
Oops, replied to wrong comment! I was talking about NTFS.
Yeah that was kind of a weird take, I’ve never felt it being slow nor heard it is from anywhere else.
If you're running it thru the FUSE driver perhaps...proprietary ntfs drivers absolutely rip
Also make sure last access time is turned off, that is a nice auditing feature for opsec, but it slows things down for the normal user. It should be off by default above 256GB drive sizes.
I meant in Windows 🙂. I guess Windows XP, in particular.
last access time
There's a good chance that's what our issue was. It really struggled with a Java monolith project. Compiling was slow, but Mercurial was painfully slow on NTFS while ext4 was blazing fast.
Been on Macs at work for a few years and don't plan on going back, but wish I knew this back then!