Larry Stotler said the following on 09/07/2013 11:41 PM:

I have a laptop running 12.3/32bit. I've used resier since S.u.S.E. adopted it & all my drives use it so I have just stuck with it.

I've always been impressed with how fast reiser recovers from a power off failure(like when I let my battery die when the laptop is asleep.....)

However, I've noticed that now with the newer versions & systemd that it seems to take MUCH longer for the fsck to complete. My P3/1.2Ghz laptop(running openSUSE 11.1) with a 320GB PATA drive finishes checking way before my Core2/2.33Ghz based laptop with a 1TB SATA drive that's running 12.3. I get about 60MB/s on the PATA drive & 100+ on the SATA drive.

Now, I removed the plymouth splash because I don't care for them & was wondering if the fsck was running faster, but that it was taking longer to display the results to the screen maybe? I have 12.2/64bit installed on this Core2 as well but I think plymouth is still there but it's just as bad.

Any ideas?

Systemd does run things in parallel. This *MAY* be eating other resources. Not a certainty and it would take examination of the logs to tell. Certainly writing to the screen takes time ... The conventional wisdom is that running fsck's in parallel is better then running them sequentially, but "it all depends". It all depends on so many things, like disk layout, the order in which things are done ... Do you use LVM? How is the disk partitioned? How large is the root partition? Is the root partition reiserFS as well? Yes, fsck is going to be a bottle-neck since so many other things can't be done until the disks are mounted. That's when the parallelism of systemd will really come into its won! -- How long did the whining go on when KDE2 went on KDE3? The only universal constant is change. If a species can not adapt it goes extinct. That's the law of the universe, adapt or die. -- Billie Walsh, May 18 2013 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org