Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
>> No.79294071

>>79294025
exFAT is better.

>> No.79294083

>>79294025
No its shit

>> No.79294093

Why?

>> No.79294099
File: 522 KB, 975x1357, 1607430257561.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79294099

>>79294025
NTFSToddlers btfo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2oTk03O8YQ

>> No.79294104

>>79294025
It werks.

>> No.79294146

>>79294099
Btrfs seems nice for server projects, might use it one day.

I want to use NTFS as a file system for my pendrive.

>> No.79294159

>>79294025
Remove the T and we can talk

>> No.79294224

>>79294025
Remove the T and the F, add an I and two Gs and an E and a R

>> No.79294312

>>79294210
Its slow but the only way to share large files with win xp

>>79294194
NTFS compression is dumb, only useful for archiving isos
Btrfs has better heuristics if you want to compress an entire drive without too much overhead, plus you can choose different compression algorithms

>> No.79294437

>>79294025
No, it's unstable broken trash eating my large files.

>> No.79294462

I wish there was a good resilient filesystem for Windows boot drives.

>> No.79294528
File: 214 KB, 512x424, 1485515337700(1).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79294528

>>79294025
Yes.
I use it on all removable media and format literally everything to NTFS just to trigger the iToddlers in my class. Their toddler devices can't write to the drives and since it's almost all women, they can't figure out how to circumvent this.

>> No.79294570

>>79294528
You might be obsessed

>> No.79294577

>>79294528
You might be based

>> No.79294611

>>79294025
Just use ZFS. Unlimited power

>> No.79294993

>>79294312
XP supports exfat

>> No.79295301

>>79294025
best filesystem, absolutely shits on ext4 (stands for EXcremenT4 btw). BTFO freetards

>> No.79295371

>>79295301
>fragments your drive
heh, nothing personnel kid

>> No.79295431

>>79295371
>he thinks this criticism is remotely relevant in 2020 lmao

>> No.79295479

>>79295431
>still fragments you are drive LIKE A BOSS

>> No.79295542

>>79294611
redpill me on ZFS

>> No.79295569

>>79294146
>Btrfs seems nice for server projects, might use it one day.
Servers -even more so the really big ones- actually mostly use xfs from what I can tell.

XFS has a stellar record in terms of stability and good features (also because most of x can be disabled as tweak in case you have it in a layer above, e.g. in your distributed filesystem or database).

>> No.79295576

>>79294528
bast

>> No.79295598

>>79295542
Not same anon.
ZFS has checksums & has nice CLI.

It also requires more hardware than most filesystems, can't grow its raidz arrays (most other solutions can and honestly at home you might want to add one drive rather than a full new array). And the "Zettabyte" part is a lie, as far as I can tell it will always scale like shit even to 20-40 drives.

Still actually it's not prohibitively bad, not too few people who use it like it. But it's not the cure-all hype thing some make it out to be.

>> No.79295608
File: 398 KB, 740x740, apple-starter-pack.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79295608

>>79294624
That's what I do
One fag had to spin up a mint vm and since he was a retard he didn't know how to use ISO files KEK.

>> No.79296502

>>79294528
benign

>> No.79296694

>>79295608
>the "i am happy and wealthy" starter pack

>> No.79297616

>>79294528
Too bad they can still read it - they just can't write to it. A real dick move would be to format to something esoteric to them, like ext or xfs or some nonsense.

>> No.79297763

Even Microsoft knows it's bad in every way, that's why they're using WinFS on Windows 10X.

>> No.79297783

>>79294624
Put RedSea on it and only TempleOS chads can read it.

>> No.79297823

>>79294146
Btrfs is fantastic for personal setups in particular. The snapshot system is a godsend for incremental backups.

>> No.79297906

>>79297846
This may help a bit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS
And to compare to a better filesystem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4

>> No.79298012

>>79296694
Most wealthy people don't buy frivolous and overpriced shit like that. It's mostly bought by poorfags pretending to be wealthy.

>> No.79298073

>>79297906
Lazy response

>> No.79299433
File: 30 KB, 200x193, 6a0120a85dcdae970b0128776ff992970c-pi.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79299433

>>79294025
I've used it since I switched from FAT a couple decades ago and haven't had any trouble yet. it's been tried and tested on the most systems for the longest time and all recovery software supports it

The only argument against it is fragmentation but any Windows system after 2006 Will automatically complete this in the background at low priority

For me, it's NTFS

>>79294528
I kekked audibly

>> No.79299620

>>79295542
You can finally use your ram above that 2GB.

>> No.79299854

>>79294025
>Is NTFS good?
Decent enough to run windows on.
It's not that great, Microsoft even attempted to replace it.

>> No.79299880

>>79295047
Why use it, if NTFS is easier to recover?

>> No.79299896

>>79294528
Now that's what I call BASED!

>> No.79299970
File: 145 KB, 1344x742, SSD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79299970

>>79295371
>>fragments your drive
>heh, nothing personnel kid
It's called having an SSD. You don't need something fancy, an SATA drive is enough to solve your issues. Also windows has a auto defrager for HHD's that runs after 3 days so this issue doesn't really exist anymore

>> No.79300074

>>79299970
SSDs do fragment though.

>> No.79300240

>>79294528
>>79294577
based

>> No.79300294

>>79300074
so does ext4

>> No.79300741

>>79299866
Generally less bloated, the way NTFS stores data is a total cluster fuck. *FAT* is much more simpler, doesn't store file ownership or permissions. It can also be used across any platform and iirc is a good bit faster.
For external storage exFAT is certainly better. For an OS you wouldn't use it unless you're memeing (Although I've seriously thought about doing it)

>> No.79300864

>>79300289
I don't care about "suckless" and the unix philosophy, Luke. I want things to just work and SSDs make things work.

>> No.79300911

>>79300864
I cannot even imagine what this has to do with my post.

>> No.79300969
File: 142 KB, 1277x1056, 1575511118729.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79300969

>>79294528
2based4me

>> No.79301057

>>79294528
Based and Redmonpilled

>> No.79301172

>>79296973
Windows 10 Enterprise and server allows ReFS volumes to be created and all versions can read and write to them. It will eventually replace NTFS.

>> No.79301244

>>79300209
It's absolutely an issue. Onboard firmware does optimistic read-ahead but it isn't aware of the underlying filesystem. With fragmentation, a lot of read-ahead will result in misses.

It's not as much an issue with hard drives, because those have to deal with the added seek latency caused by fragmentation, but you're going to have seeking anyhow if you have concurrent access to more than one file.

>> No.79301293

>>79301244
I meant to say it's not as much an issue as it is with hard drives. The point though is in most workloads, fragmentation does not really matter unless it is very severe, and then it's not going to affect performance as much as stability and storage efficiency.

>> No.79301307

>>79294025
NTFS is just a barely, slightly better FAT32/exFAT. Still proprietary garbage that microsoft just refuses to let it die when the linux/new FSs are lightyears ahead.

>> No.79301316

>>79301170
Ntfs is as ancient as ext2 and while decent for its time, it wasn't a match for ext3 never mind ext4 or the amazing xfs which is only about a year older than ntfs. Arguably xfs got some significant features on Linux meanwhile, but it was better even back then.

>> No.79301401

it's ssSOOOOSSsoo goodd!!!!

>> No.79301427

>>79301307
FAT32 had an actually significant tendency to corrupt. NTFS doesn't really terribly.

FAT32 also had an even more significant tendency to fragment - NTFS at least trivially does something against this. Window may still need to schedule defragments by default so the issue doesn't grow too large, but still, better than FAT32 which almost literally did nothing.

>> No.79301466

people who actually argue about this shit suffer from classic time wasting autist shit, no one gives a fuck what works better, we just use whatever is the newest and move along, holy FUCK

>> No.79302837

>>79294528
Yeahhh.....I'm gonna need you to patch me through to the Based Department...

>> No.79303095
File: 379 KB, 1136x767, hot_portuguese_bitch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79303095

NTFS is a garbage! Use btrfs on windows: https://github.com/maharmstone/btrfs

Just werks on my machine

>> No.79303641

>>79294224
kek

>> No.79303653
File: 1.94 MB, 640x358, 1594944200921.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
79303653

>>79294528
anon how could you do that to those poor roasties

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action