On Thursday 10 October 2002 04:42, Buchan Milne wrote: > Aleksander Adamowski wrote: > > In the 9.0 installer, during the "Setup filesystem" stage, when you > > create a new partition, by default its filesystem type is tset to ext3fs. > > > > Now I have to tell all the newbie converts that install Linux to > > manually change it to ReiserFS, because it is a more advanced filesystem. > > After all, ext3 is just ext2 with a journal strapped-on. ReiserFS is a > > new vision to filesystem design. And it is faster. > > Besides all the other arguments: > > ext3 has quotas (ok, non-root users can't check them, but they are > enforced), and ACLs (when mounted with the 'acl' option). > > XFS is probably the only other FS I would consider, mainly since it has > a working dump, which also preserves metadata (like acls). > > > If they just used the defaults, they'd probably be disappointed with > > Linux "because it it slower than my Windows". Yes, ext2 and ext3 are > > slower than FAT16/32. > > Corporate users will miss features that have been available since > Windows NT (ACLs) and Windows 2000 finally supports quotas. The only two > filesystems that can compare with NTFS5 are XFS and ext3. > > The OS to beat isn't win9x anymore, and hasn't been for a long time ... > the OSs to beat are win2k Server, winxp pro and the upcoming Windows.net > > > So what do you think about changing the default FS type to Reiser in > > mdk9.1? > > IMHO, when it works, has quotas and acl support, and performs better in > most or all areas then ext3. > > Buchan so how about ext3 vs XFS wich would you prefer? and why?
The advantages vs. disadvantages?
