hi peeps, I have a mix FS on my box currently on dual boot XP/fedora 7, I have 2 hd, 1st drive is mixed with NTFS/EXT3 for my dual OS and the 2nd drive is on a FAT32 which all my documents/downloaded files and MP3/OGG reside so that it can be used by both OS. Now my question is :
Does having 3 diff fs can degrate performance?
XP (ntfs + fat32)
F7 (ext3 + fat32)
my box is a P4 2.8 / 1gb ram/ 128 mb GPU
Registered Linux User # 279330
Answer is it depends on how the FS is getting read.
On linux I know more, so I will use that as an example.
On linux you have two main ways of doing an FS driver, Kernel or with FUSE. Fuse is generally a safe and reliable method, but resource hungry and much slower. Kernel based ones rock. Flat out that is the difference right there. Now generally speaking, FUSE plugins exist solely becuase no method of doing a legal kernel module exist. NTFS is like this. I have a 750GB seagate USB drive that uses NTFS and, although slow and resource hungry (think hungry hungry hippos hungry), it works well.
If you can get away with ONLY kernel based methods on linux, that is the holy grail, and can be done for some people. Me, I gotta use FUSE. What sticks me in an ugly corner is the need to use it on Mac, Linux, and Windows. Nothing is really that cross platform that can handle the things I need (FAT32 sucks balls). Ext3 is close, but a real PITA on Windows, and iffy on Mac. NTFS is done via FUSE on each linux and mac. HPFS works somehow on linux (not sure how since I cant get it to read a portable 120GB drive formatted as such).
Personally I reccomend the most open method to use always. Ext3 is the best case generally, but considering this tank drive that I have needs to be easily made work on ANY machine I run into, NTFS is all I got that generally fits the bill. A NAS server would do the trick if I didnt need to port the bad boy around, but alas that isnt the case.