On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 06:53, Donal Byrne wrote: > Thanks Yura, bust any reason why ext3 would be better? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Yura Pismerov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 08 October 2002 22:53 > To: Donal Byrne > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Re: [Samba] Filesystem for Samba server > > > > ext3 is probably the best choice. > > > Donal Byrne wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > Sorry if this is a stupid question (bit of a newbie). I'm building a > Samba > > > fileserver on a box with a hardware raid array of about 65GB which I'm > > > hoping to share out to the local LAN . I was wondering if the filesystem > > > used (ext2,ext3, reiserfs etc) on the partition where the Samba shares > > > will reside makes much of a difference? I'd obviously like to use a > > > journalling filesystem but can't seem to find any info to guide my > choice. I think you should use XFS -
1) it is well supported by sgi 2) it is mature 3) it is fast 4) it is in use on such large filesystems already 5) acls are native I saw somewhere in this thread that someone was considering a 12 disk raid 5. I'd suggest splitting this into a couple of raid5s and use LVM if you need the space to be contiguous. I've found that performance is optimal with about 5 disks brad -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
