On Friday 13 February 2009 12:49, Chetan S wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Abhishek Amberkar [अभिषेक] > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello LUG Members, > > > > I want to try XFS on my home system. I have read some articles > > saying XFS is faster than Ext3 but Less reliable than it. > > So, I would like to read your experiences about FSs other than > > Ext3. > > > > -- > > You could search for some benchmarking for different fs but here > are my exp - > > 1. Desktop related files - fs = Reiser fs ( I know there's no > more development etc etc ... ) but it still is the most suitable > for an avg linux user. If your h/w is old don't use this. btw data > recovery is really bad in reiser fs you stand losing your data > big-time if the h/w crashes ( different from power failure ) > 2. DB , Big files fs = XFS works really well for data where new > files aren't created and the file size is really big. yane ki > movies store karna hai toh yahan karo. > 3. ext3 / ext 4 = production grade filesystems that allow really > good data recovery in case there's some h/w failure. home office > vagera ke liye yeh accha hai. If you want more speed try the > writeback mode. > 4. JFS ka experience toh dicey raha hai.
Jfs is faster. > No great advantage over > xfs / ext3 5. If you are adventurous then give ext 4 ( with extents > ) or btrfs a try on a separate partition. btrfs is not in mainline and highily experimental afaik. > > > regards > C -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
