On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 16:04, Robin 'Roblimo' Miller wrote:
> savatage wrote:
>
> >Ok there is a XFS as well option should I perhaps try this, instead of the
> >Ext3?
> >Or stick with Ext3for now?
> >
>
> I'm running Reiser in my current install, but I know full well that if I
> have a hard drive blip I'll lose everything.
>
> EXT3's main advantage is that you can convert an existing EXT2 partition
> to it without data loss.
Which cuts both ways, because I recall reading an article warning that
ext3 will also then let you force-mount that filesystem as ext2, make
changes, then re-mount as ext3, and if you do so with outstanding
journal entries, you can destroy the filesystem entirely.
Any filesystem that, "by design" as it were, allows you to destroy the
filesystem doing perfectly normal filesystem stuff is badly broken in my
opinion.
> Reiser is supposedly the fastest jfs, but on a home/office machine with
> a typical hard drive, I doubt that the speed difference will be noticeable.
You may be surprised. There is a *noticable* difference between ext3
and XFS for me on this new laptop of mine. I've been trying different
distros and different filesystems to see what works the most reliably.
RedHat 9 with the SGI-XFS installer on XFS filesystems is noticably
faster and more responsive than the stock installer with ext3.
"fastest" is also relative to what you're doing. Reiser does extremely
well with handling very small files, because if they're small enough, it
just stores the file data in the same block as the file metadata, which
saves a whole I/o operation, inode, and all associated stuff. XFS does
too to some extent, but is not as specialized for handling that case as
reiser.
However, I've found that reiser tends to undergo peaks of I/o starvation
if you are doing a lot of disk I/o. It will completely block as it
flushes to disk, while XFS streams very smoothly and I've found that
multiple heavy I/o operations perform very responsively under XFS, while
being virtually useless on Reiser or ext3.
> I have not tried XFS but have heard that it's rock-solid. Does it have a
> fsck or fix option of some sort?
Absolutely. It has a great set of tools that let you do/see all sorts
of things with an XFS filesystem.
I've only just recently had my first instance of data-loss with XFS, and
that was on the aforementioned laptop when I had a hard panic that wiped
out part of the filesystem entirely. XFS recovered a bunch of stuff in
lost+found, but I never trust that level of destruction to leave things
in a good state and just reinstalled.
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- "We all enter this world in the | Support Electronic Freedom same way: naked; screaming; soaked | http://www.eff.org/ in blood. But if you live your | http://www.anti-dmca.org/ life right, that kind of thing |--------------------------- doesn't have to stop there." -- Dana Gould----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:13:10 EDT