Wow, I'm being quoted :) I should elaborate a little upon what I wrote in August (quoted below). As I noted before, ReiserFS is very reliable. I believe SuSE use it by default. Just be sure to mount it with the notail parameter if you want to use it for /boot or if you want maximum performance at the expense of a little space efficiency (but ReiserFS would still be just as efficient as ext3 or XFS).
XFS is better for large files, since it was originally developed by SGI for multimedia processing. Ext3 is better for mission-critical environments (if you use full data journalling) if speed isn't too important, and its database speeds aren't too bad either. On my main system, I use ext3 for /boot and /, and ReiserFS for /usr, /tmp, and /var. Ext3 and ReiserFS can be resized both positively and negatively, which makes them great candidates for EVMS (which is like software RAID and LVM combined, but better). On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:36:41 +0200, Roman Korcek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > Does any have any preferences to which journalized filesystem I > > should > > use in MDK 9.0. I am assuming there is still three to choose from. I'm > > trying to research which is "best", but only finding older material. > > Does anyone have a preference? Why? Which filesystem is the default > > now? I want to map out my choices before I get there. > > Sridhar wrote this in August: > > > On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 18:12:43 +0100, Anne Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >> My ext2 partitions are now ext3 - I couldn't fathom the Control Centre > >route, > but the command line couldn't have been simpler. > >> > >> For future reference - i.e. when I move on to Mandrake 9 - I get the > >> impression that there are a number of problems with some of the file > >systems, > with Reiser being probably the least problem. Is this right? > > > > I am not aware of any problems with Mandrake 9.0 specifically. I have read > > that XFS doesn't like certain kernel optimisations like preempt and > > low-latency, but Mandrake won't be including those anyway. I like to compile > > my own kernels with these patches included (they can make a big difference > > to system performance), so I avoid XFS. Otherwise, XFS appears to be a very > > reliable and fast filesystem. For most normal operations, ext3 is the > > slowest, even with only metadata journalling enabled (unlike the other > > journalling FSs, ext3 can journal_all_ of your data, which is safer but much > > slower). Its strengths are in database transaction speeds and its forward > > and backward compatibility with ext2. I personally think ReiserFS is the > > best for home systems. It is reasonably fast, being exceptionally speedy > > with small (sub-100K) files. It has had problems in the past, but they seem > > to have been ironed out in the more recent releases. JFS is very > > space-inefficient (each file takes about double the space), but is arguably > > the fastest FS. It also has problems with fragmentation, so you need to > > periodically defrag it (just like with Windows and FAT/NTFS). > > > > Of these filesystems, ReiserFS is probably the most complex (using features > > like B-trees, etc.). It is also the only journalling FS that has been > > designed from scratch, the others being the continuation of preexisting FSs. > > Nevertheless, it has proven to be quite robust in actual use, so I > > wholeheartedly recommend it. > > > > -- > > Sridhar Dhanapalan > > > > If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed... > > ...Oh, wait a minute, he already does. > > > -- > HTH > Roman -- Sridhar Dhanapalan "Recently I bought Office XP. It was quite unpleasant feeling giving so much money for so buggy product. ... Solution: Uninstall Office XP and Windows." -- Georgi Guninski, security expert, http://www.guninski.com, 2001-07-12
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
