UFS gets Mac OS X slow

maccatalan · #1 October 1st, 2003, 04:21 AM

Hi.

Just for fun, when I reinstalled Mac OS X (10.2.6) this week-end on my PowerMac G4 933Mhz, I formated the disks to "Unix File System". I though command line applications would better like it, since then we trully have a case sensitive file system.
However, you remark so clearly how the system is slower (maybe I should better say "slow" since system was fast ;-) ). Safari which one started very fast now needs some seconds. And the more strange off all is when I wanted to install Photoshop : "This is a network volume, can't be installed" ... !!! ... and one thing more : the volume's name cannot be changed.

So UFS as a data volume (partitioning disks) for easier data exchange with linux or UFS as a fully supported file system ? In case of fully supported FS, then why it makes the system so slow ?

edX · #2 October 1st, 2003, 04:53 AM

you've been here since june of 2001 and you're just now figuring this out? there have been lots of posts, whole threads even, about how slow UFS is. we once even had a huge arguement about whether os x was too slow to use until we discovered that the complainer was using UFS. he switched to HFS+ and shut up. (ask georgelien about that one sometime

)

the reason, in less than technical terms, is that mac os x is a MAC OS!! it may have unix at its core, but it's still mac and needs the most recent mac file system to run properly. this is also why you still need to do regular maintainence on your drives and not just expect prebinding to take care of everything.

Arden · #3 October 1st, 2003, 04:54 AM

Because it is a UNIX file system, and not meant for the UI-happy stuff that regular Mac users like to do. I suggest you back up all data you may have put onto your UFS drive and reformat it for HFS+.

Read more about HFS+ vs. UFS:
http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/topic/33967-1.html
http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthr...threadid=36679
http://BigBlueRoom.Net/HFSvsUFS.html
http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthr...threadid=33972

maccatalan · #4 October 1st, 2003, 05:08 AM

Thank you for these quick replies and sorry for comming once again over a so debated topic ;-)

However I did not expected Mac OS to be faster but just to be equivalent. What is the use of such a file system ? maybe just to get the "UNIX Based" icon, isn't it ? Well ... before asking what are the advantages of this FS I will read the related posts.

sorry again,
and thanks again,
Pierre.

ElDiabloConCaca · #5 October 1st, 2003, 10:10 AM

I'm sure if you did nothing BUT UNIX stuff you'd see a marked improvement with using a UNIX file system -- however, Apple does recommend using an HFS+ file system unless you absolutely have a need not to.

If you stayed in the command line all day long and have a need for the UNIX file system, you'd be happy... however, as others have posted, Mac OS X is a Macintosh Operating System, and likes its disks to be formatted as such.

I was always curious and have been wanting to test OS X on a UNIX drive, but just haven't gotten around to it yet.

edX · #6 October 1st, 2003, 01:22 PM

my understanding is that UFS is primarily usefull as a nonbootable partition for running certain unix native apps off of. not for the average mac user.

Darkshadow · #7 October 1st, 2003, 02:47 PM

I use a UFS drive for my swap partition, which works pretty well.

maccatalan · #8 October 3rd, 2003, 09:13 PM

you fool. ;-)
You just seem to be a very mac maniac. Using a separate swap partitiion ...

just tell me : does it provides a real performance gain to use a separate volume for swap ?

have fun,
bye,
Pierre.