On Mon Mar 04 9:38 -0700, Dean Brissinger wrote: > After doing my best to break the journaling file systems I have > determined that XFS and ReiserFS are the two more reliable and fast > solutions. I corrupted both JFS and EXT3 to the point I could no longer > boot. My test was to bring the system down dirty repeatedly without > performing a consistency check on boot. In beta3 ReiserFS and XFS are > more durable. XFS is a pretty slow file system unless you're working > with BIG files. Reiser does better with lots of small files (a tad > slower than ext3, but worth it). > > I managed to ruin and XFS filesystem as shipped with 8.1. The kernel > patches from SGI are pretty good on a raw kernel or RedHat kernel (I > haven't broken it in such cases). I assume XFS has been upgraded in the > 2.4.17+ mdk kernels (haven't looked). > > Has anyone published current tests on the file systems on Linux for > durability and speed? My test is hardly comprehensive.
I seem to remember a post to Slashdot in the spring of 2001 that benchmarked the different journaling fs's. I think there's been at least one Ask Slashdot on which one is the best, also. -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] When it comes down to desperation, You make the best of your situation. Linux 2.4.17-20mdk 3:01pm up 7 days, 43 min, 16 users, load average: 0.23, 0.23, 0.26
msg58332/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
