Will using FAT32 provide better pagefile performance than NTFS?

Question

I want to do a grid of checkboxes that contain products/categories. The products and categories could be dynamic (I mean, the count of products/categories can change). I'm able to create the grid and save the data when I check a box. My problem is to use ajax properly.

Here is my model :

 public class ProductModel
 {
    public List<List<ProductItemGrid>> ProductItemGrid { get; set; }
    public List<string> ProductNameList { get; set; }
    public List<string> CategoryNameList { get; set; }

}

public class ProductItemGrid
{
    public int ProductID { get; set; }
    public int CategoryID { get; set; }
    public bool ProductInCategory { get; set; }
}

Part of my view, (I use the list of list to populate it) :

@for (int i = 0; i < Model.ProductNameList.Count(); i++)
{
<tr class=@(i % 2 == 0 ? "even" : "odd")>

    <td style="font-weight: bold;">
        @Html.DisplayFor(x => x.ProductNameList[i])
    </td>
    @foreach (var result in Model.ProductItemGrid[i])
    {
        string ckBoxName = result.ProductID.ToString() + result.CategoryID.ToString();
        <td id='<%=ckBoxName%>'>
        @using (Ajax.BeginForm("UpdateProductItem", "Product", new AjaxOptions() { InsertionMode = InsertionMode.Replace, UpdateTargetId = ckBoxName }))
        {

                @Html.Hidden("p_CategoryID", result.CategoryID)
                @Html.Hidden("p_ProductID", result.ProductID)
                @Html.CheckBox("<%=ckBoxName%>", result.ProductInCategory, new { onclick = "test" })

        }
        </td>
    }
    </tr>
}

Right now the view contain some error, but Im sure you get the main idea. With the ajax form, Im able to update my database, but my main problem is to update the checkbox itself after doing the C# part. Also, I'm trying to name the < td> to be able to update the ckbox by giving him a name as ProductID_CategoryID (so it would be easier for me to know which one Im updating). Thks.

Solution 1

It makes some sense that FAT32 might be a bit faster than NTFS, since it doesn't have the overhead of journaling and other advanced features that NTFS offers. See here, here, and here for some references that are equally likely to be verified or hearsay. The first one suggests that the volume and cluster sizes are going to determine which is faster for you.

Putting the pagefile on a separate disk is going to buy you way more performance than the particulars of the filesystem. Most likely, it's not enough to lose any sleep over.

Solution 2

Journaling does have a small impact on performance. But this only occurs when the metadata of the file changes, such during file creation, deletion, resizing, etc. In the case of the pagefile this would normally only occur at bootup. Journaling, and most of the other features of NTFS, do not come into play at all during normal pagefile activities.

In any event pagefile performance only becomes important when it is a limiting factor, which in most cases it isn't. Most attempts at optimizing the pagefile are wasted effort and have virtually no impact on performance.

Comments

[Chris S]

+1 "Most likely, it's not enough to lose any sleep over" - If you really need that last bit of performance, buy more RAM.

[Jjames]

@TuxRug: At first glance it sounds plausible...at second glance you'd just turn swapping off. Guess he never looked a second time at it.

[alex]

Looks cool , but Im using some libraries on other projects and it doesnt help me to understand the whole complexity of javascript. This example is for me to understand better the ajax method. Thks! :)

[Kissaki]

The question was asking about “performance”. I would not categorize (“wasted”) size under performance.

[Matthew Ayers]

@TuxRug it's a useful hack if you're running 32-bit Windows and have more than 4GB RAM as you can get ramdisk drivers that will use the RAM Windows can't access in those circumstances.

[Nauf_M]

NTFS only journals metadata. Journal is not used when existing files modified in-place while already open, thus it does not affect performance. And growing files on NTFS is easier than on FAT (though with separate partition, it's reasonable to set fixed pagefile size). I didn't test real world performance though, and it might be interesting.