On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:01:04PM +0000, Tim Southerwood wrote: > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:06:45 -0500 > "William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So my questions to the great users of myth.. > > > > - Are people using XFS and finding it generally stable or flaky like I find > > it? > > I've had XFS running on my home server for a good 2 years now 4 FSs 80-160GB > in size each) > and it's been rock solid. > > At work I have a large disk based backup system running with XFS for about 9 > months > (3 FSs, 2TB, 2TB, 1.2TB) and XFS has certainly been better than JFS. No > problems at all (cross fingers) > and that system sees about 30-60GB of changes every night in an intense burst. > > This is under both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels. > > So it gets my vote. > > Whatever you do, don't use ReiserFS(!)
I can't comment in Reiser since I have used it very little. From what I have seen, people try to make reiser up to more than it is, which does the opposite in getting me to want to use it. I have used JFS and XFS for over 2 years on various systems including my MythBackend that runs 5 Maxtor 200GB drives in LVM now (It was raid0 until a few months ago and when I rebuilt the system I used LVM since it's more functional). As for which FS, XFS and JFS are very much alike. Performance is only minorly different. JFS seemed to have a quicker delete on very large (80GB files) than XFS by 1-2 seconds. I'm using XFS now though because it seems to be better in everything else. XFS also appears to work better with LVM for resizing/adding/removing drives. By far though, the biggest impact on performance is the drive. I have tested Hitachi, Western Digital, Maxtor and Seagate drives. I won't touch WD ever again because I've had too many drives fail. Hitachi is only a little better than WD in my experience. Maxtor's seem to be very reliable but seagate has a better warranty, probably as reliable, but they perform half again as well as the maxtor drives I have. I've decided any new drives I buy will be seagate, and thanks to outpost.com, it's very likely to find the 300GB drives for near $150 (I think they're $159.99 right now). They have 16MB cache too. But comparing a 160GB seagate to 200GB maxtor (Both with 8MB cache) The seagate runs about 20% faster read times and 30% faster write times than the maxtors. So... My recommendation is to get seagate drives and run XFS/lvm on top of them. BTW, the only flakiness I have seen in most FS's lately are caused by disk problems, not FS design problems. --Brandon
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
