On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:36:22 -0400, Glenn Burkhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 11 August 2003 01:14 pm, James Sparenberg wrote: > > On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 16:51, Lee Wiggers wrote: > > > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:26:18 -0400 > > > > > > "Lawson, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Has anyone used these? What are you comments about these. ( Good, Bad) > > > > > > > > James S. Lawson > > > > > > Put my vote in for xfs. Been using it exclusively except for windows > > > shares for 2 years. > > > > > > If I can't break it, it can't be broken. > > > > > > Lee > > > > I've got Reiserfs on about 16 machines right now. Not a single byte of > > data lost in the last 2 years (realated to file systems.) I know that > > Knoppix and other "distro on a disk" releases use xfs. Basic > > conclusion. I'm sticking with reiserfs. (and from what I'm reading. > > Reiserfs4 is going to change the way we do things ... totally. sounds > > sweet) > > > > James > > Have all the problems ReiserFS had with NFS been fixed? The last time I > looked, which was a while ago, there were still threads on the ReiserFS > mailing list about problems with using an NFS server on a Reiser file system > (despite many protestations by Herr Reiser on their web site that all NFS > problems had been resolved!).
The NFS problems were fixed a long time ago. I use NFS + ReiserFS here with no problems whatsoever. When you choose a filesystem, you need to consider what you will be doing with it. IMHO, ReiserFS is best for ordinary desktop computing tasks, so I use it for most of my partitions. Where I need a little more reliability (like on / and /boot) I use ext3 with full data journalling. I have been through numerous crashes and power failures, and those two FSs have never failed me. XFS is optimised for large files, and from what I've seen its small file performance is not very good. I wouldn't recommend it unless you are editing huge (at least hundreds of MB) files on a frequent basis. I don't know much about JFS, other that it isn't of much use on a desktop system. Files on JFS take up twice as much space, and the filesystem requires periodic defragmentation (although it isn't nearly as bad as FAT in DOS/Windows). On the plus side, it is supposed to be very fast in certain server tasks. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan [Yama | http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] {PGP/GnuPG: http://dhanapalan.com/yama.asc 049D38B4 : A7A9 8A02 78CB AB1B FCE4 EEC6 2DD9 249B 049D 38B4} "Technically, Windows is an 'operating system,' which means that it supplies your computer with the basic commands that it needs to suddenly, with no warning whatsoever, stop operating." -- Dave Barry
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
