On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 08:05:28AM -0700, Chris Wakefield wrote: > Thanks for the replies so far. > > Don't want to start a war, but I'd like to hear about your > filesystem suggestions....:^)
I use ext3. I might go to ext4 the day it is done. > Seriously thinking of going with Reiser4. I've been a fan > of Reiser3.6 for quite a while now. Now that I finally > managed to find the pure patch against various kernel.org > http://chichkin_i.zelnet.ru/namesys/ > Of course you gotta use lilo to boot Reiser4, which is fine > with me. I will probably never again touch reiserfs. I don't like silent data corruption, which reiserfs 3.6 has done to me numorous times. I also like a filesystem with reliable repair tools, which reiserfs has never had, and probably never will (it is too complex and with not enough redundandy). > Truly have found ext3 to be ho-hum, but I guess that's the > point....;^) It's reliable, the performance is decent. I tried XFS for a while, but that was around 2.6.10, and there were some serious bugs at the time that would cause system crashes and abysmal performance when working with lots of small files (like say gcc source code or something). It would take hours and often crash if you did rm -rf on the gcc source dir or a kernel source. I switched to ext3 again after that. If the bugs have indeed been fixed it may actually have been a better choice for my mythtv box since it has lots of large files, but I use ext3 there as well. I have never used JFS, although it seems support for it may be going away and it might get dropped. Not sure, but perhaps it isn't worth trying if the situation is that unclear. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
