Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux File Systems for Windows: Use EXT4 / XFS / Btrfs On Windows

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • blacknova
    replied
    Performance tests would be welcome.

    Leave a comment:


  • microcode
    replied
    Normally I wouldn't be endorsing proprietary software, but if you're going to run Windows anyway, you might as well send the good folks at Paragon some dosh for what are probably good quality implementations of these filesystems, if you need such a thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • microcode
    replied
    Originally posted by kaszak View Post
    NTFS-3g is going to be dead last cuz it's FUSE-based.
    Last I heard, NTFS-3g outperformed Windows native NTFS.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by eydee View Post
    Windows is not the best optimized OS out there, because its special linux subsystem runs linux software slower than real linux does. Nice logic. In that case, linux distributions aren't the best optimized OS out there, because wine runs windows programs slower than real windows does.
    http://www.tuxradar.com/content/benc...a-vs-windows-7
    The WSL disc benchmarks out performed native win32 and win64 for disc IO performance in a lot of cases as well. This is what gets interesting some programs run faster under Wine than under windows because they depend on something that Windows does badly this can be a lot of disc reads.

    So like it or not Windows is not the best optimised OS out there so it would be interesting to see windows native ntfs face off against fuse ntfs-3g as there is a good chance that particular benchmarks windows will lose to the fuse implementation..

    Leave a comment:


  • eydee
    replied
    Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

    I would not be too sure of that. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/...17-vangoor.pdf this was a review of Fuse based overhead.
    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...ntel-7900x-wsl
    And phoronix has done WSL vs Linux on hardware. The performance difference for IO is large enough that some benchmarks NTFS-3G under Linux could be beating NTFS under Windows.


    Windows is not the best optimised operating system out there.
    Windows is not the best optimized OS out there, because its special linux subsystem runs linux software slower than real linux does. Nice logic. In that case, linux distributions aren't the best optimized OS out there, because wine runs windows programs slower than real windows does.

    Conclusion: MS-DOS wins.

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Originally posted by audi100quattro View Post
    Is there something for cryptsetup on windows? possibly through WSL? I've looked various times in the past only to come up empty. Almost all storage I have requires cryptsetup luksOpen first, so...
    I don't see why cryptsetup wouldn't work through cygwin?

    Or you could mount the storage on a proper linux box with cryptsetup, then share it with Windows using Samba.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by kaszak View Post
    NTFS-3g is going to be dead last cuz it's FUSE-based.
    I would not be too sure of that. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/...17-vangoor.pdf this was a review of Fuse based overhead.
    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...ntel-7900x-wsl
    And phoronix has done WSL vs Linux on hardware. The performance difference for IO is large enough that some benchmarks NTFS-3G under Linux could be beating NTFS under Windows.


    Windows is not the best optimised operating system out there.

    Leave a comment:


  • kaszak
    replied
    Originally posted by sirblackheart View Post
    How about a NTFS (windows native) vs. ntfs3-g vs. Btrfs vs. WinBtrfs benchmark?
    NTFS-3g is going to be dead last cuz it's FUSE-based.

    Leave a comment:


  • audir8
    replied
    Originally posted by nemequ View Post

    IIRC cryptsetup supports TrueCrypt these days… If you need something that works on both Windows and Linux perhaps you could switch to that.
    Seems like https://github.com/t-d-k/LibreCrypt might work.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    albeit without commercial support.
    Michael Do you really mean that, or do you mean "write" support?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X