> This box is 90% XFS on LVM on RAID-0... trust me, I *enjoy* using XFS,
> but have found abrupt losses of power have you lose the last 3-5 
> seconds of work you were doing on the system.

>> Then why do you prefer XFS?
>> I mean no sarcasm here, this is an honest question.  I've been examining file 
>> systems and trying to decide which ones are best for which situations.
>> If data-loss is more likely with XFS, what makes you stick to it anyways?, as 
>> opposed to using - say - ReiserFS.  What do you think of ReiserFS?
>>
>> I don't know much about RAID.  Isn't RAID-0 more prone to data loss?  Again, 
>> I've been looking at RAIDs lately and I'm curious.

I prefer XFS over other filesystems within my RAID-0 array because it
is the fastest (for me) AND because being within a RAID-0 array is prone to
data loss anyways. See, if my RAID-0 array goes down, so will all the
information within the XFS (or any partition) partitions, so might as 
well live on the dangerous and super fast side :)

On a serious note, this is my partitioning scheme:

/dev/hda3      jfs    242M   38M  205M  16% /
tmpfs        tmpfs    2.0M   20K  2.0M   1% /mnt/.init.d
/dev/666/var   jfs    816M  125M  692M  16% /var
/dev/666/tmp   jfs    525M   85M  441M  17% /tmp
/dev/666/usr   jfs    2.9G  2.6G  308M  90% /usr
/dev/666/home  xfs    2.9G  2.3G  701M  77% /home
/dev/666/opt   xfs    388M  309M   80M  80% /opt
/dev/hda6 reiserfs     48G   42G  5.6G  89% /server
/dev/hdc1      xfs    3.2G  1.4G  1.8G  44% /natas
tmpfs        tmpfs    378M     0  378M   0% /dev/shm

Anything I dont want to lose in case of my RAID-0 array going down
I've saved in /dev/hda6 and have backed up on CD-R's. I'm obviously
taking the 50% chance that /dev/hda isnt the one the hard drive that
experiences the actual failure in case of my RAID-0 array going
down. I'm sorry, I just noticed I actually varied this box with JFS, XFS
and ReiserFS. My other boxes are 90% XFS, because I really dont care
if I lose the information on them or not. This one is a bit more
varied, because I have had better experience with data integrity on
reiserfs ( which is what holds a backup of my home as well as the
other partitions in case of a RAID-0 failure, I then just go ahead
and redo a new disk and replace my backups stored on /dev/hda6 onto the new
drive... so I pretty much start from the point I left off... in other
words, instead of using a stage1*.tbz I use the backup of my original
system which I have on /dev/hda6)

XFS / RAID-0 (thanks to mkennedy for the initial RAID-0 push) is seriously 
lightning quick @ this end, and I have made the choice that performance
is more important to me at this time than data integrity, since I do
have a backup of all the information on /dev/hda6 and on
CD-R's... 

But to answer your question:

>> Then why do you prefer XFS

Because I like to live dangerously :p

Louis C. Candell

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Reply via email to