Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
+++ Moz [2009-04-03 21:17:14]: Choosing a filesystem because it's power outage resistant is not logical at all. No file system is geared for power outages which is a physical failure. So singling out ext4 is bad because you can suffer just as bad a corruption on a power outage on any filessytem. Sure, I understand that. I have never said that ext4 is bad. In fact, what is bad is that I can not use it. Would you point out where I have said ext4 is bad? I said singling out ext4 is bad ... very different from what you construed it as. Very true. And in addition to the UPS, I have solar energy and a windturbine providing me backups. However, in spite of these, power can fail. And does fail once in a year or some times more frequently. Perhaps that is not an issue for you, but it is for me. And so I remain with ext3, and yes, I do realise that this also may fail some time and I might loose data... Your PC can talk to the UPS and go for a clean shutdown when they are running low on charge. Kingsly -- --- Kingsly At Users Dot SourceForge Dot Net -- http://kingsly.org/ --- pgpgL4rGUhxMn.pgp Description: PGP signature -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
+++ Moz [2009-04-01 22:24:38]: Tricky question. People would swear by a file system as ideal. I have read that ext4 has zero tolerance for powerouts and much greater chance of it being corrupted in such circumstances, so it is out of question for people like me. Choosing a filesystem because it's power outage resistant is not logical at all. No file system is geared for power outages which is a physical failure. So singling out ext4 is bad because you can suffer just as bad a corruption on a power outage on any filessytem. An OS crash is a software event and filessytems can be geared to deal with it, whereas a power outage is physical event and there is no way for software to deal with it. That's why you have things like UPS to ensure that your system goes for a clean halt/suspend during a power outage. Kingsly -- --- Kingsly At Users Dot SourceForge Dot Net -- http://kingsly.org/ --- pgprpByOqgE0g.pgp Description: PGP signature -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
Hi Kingsly, Tricky question. People would swear by a file system as ideal. I have read that ext4 has zero tolerance for powerouts and much greater chance of it being corrupted in such circumstances, so it is out of question for people like me. Choosing a filesystem because it's "power outage resistant" is not logical at all. No file system is geared for power outages which is a physical failure. So singling out ext4 is bad because you can suffer just as bad a corruption on a power outage on any filessytem. Sure, I understand that. I have never said that ext4 is bad. In fact, what is bad is that I can not use it. Would you point out where I have said ext4 is bad? An OS crash is a software event and filessytems can be geared to deal with it, whereas a power outage is physical event and there is no way for software to deal with it. Agreed. I have no issues here. That's why you have things like UPS to ensure that your system goes for a clean halt/suspend during a power outage. Very true. And in addition to the UPS, I have solar energy and a windturbine providing me backups. However, in spite of these, power can fail. And does fail once in a year or some times more frequently. Perhaps that is not an issue for you, but it is for me. And so I remain with ext3, and yes, I do realise that this also may fail some time and I might loose data... Moz -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
@Onkar: Nothing. But with the variety of filesystems available I think there may be others better suited for managing large files. @Manish: I currently use ext2 @Moz: Yes. I heard that about ext4 so I am staying away from it. -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
On 4/2/09, Manish Sinha (मनीष सिन्हा) m...@manishsinha.net wrote: Come on Fabian, even if you upgrade to ext3 ,that would be much better than ext2. You can even give reiserfs a try. I prefer all stable filesystems perfectly suitable for the job. Like ext3, reiserfs, XFS etc. Waiting for ZFS. Hmmm OK. Just thought that there were better filesystems than ext3 out there. Will upgrade it now :) -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
Hmmm OK. Just thought that there were better filesystems than ext3 out there. Will upgrade it now :) My home machine is running continously for the last 3 years amidst unclean shutdowns due to power outages at least twice a week. Filesystem is reiserfs on Debian Etch. regards, Nishant -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
2009/4/1 Moz list...@gmail.com: Tricky question. People would swear by a file system as ideal. I have read that ext4 has zero tolerance for powerouts and much greater chance of it being corrupted in such circumstances, so it is out of question for people like me. I have been using ext4 on arch linux since a few days now. I have had a couple of unclean shutdowns but no corruptions till now. In fact I had two distros getting corrupt due to unclean shutdown on the same drive but smart gives a clean chit the disk. Still, how does ext4 fares will be too early to judge on my install. -- It is not enough to have a good mind. The main thing is to use it well. -- Rene Descartes -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
निशांत / Nishant wrote: Hmmm OK. Just thought that there were better filesystems than ext3 out there. Will upgrade it now :) My home machine is running continously for the last 3 years amidst unclean shutdowns due to power outages at least twice a week. Filesystem is reiserfs on Debian Etch. Nishant, Just wanted to ask whether there is any data loss due to unclean shutdowns? Even partial corruption? -- Manish Sinha Blog [ http://blog.manishsinha.net/ ] Tech Blog [ http://manishtech.wordpress.com/ ] Twitter [ http://twitter.com/ManishSinha ] -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
Nishant, Just wanted to ask whether there is any data loss due to unclean shutdowns? Even partial corruption? None till date, but that is no guarantee that it can't happen in future. If you are in a situation that you need to rebuild tree, its the most scariest. Best thing is fastest recovery from unclean shutdowns, journal replays are really fast on reiserfs. You can experience the speed from the moment you issue mkreiserfs on an 100GB partition, its over within a few seconds. regards, Nishant -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
निशांत / Nishant wrote: None till date, but that is no guarantee that it can't happen in future. If you are in a situation that you need to rebuild tree, its the most scariest. Yeah! Heard about it. Am safe since I run Ubuntu on laptop which has a power-backup from battery. Still X-crash and many other unusual freezes do make me do a hard-reboot(sometimes). Best thing is fastest recovery from unclean shutdowns, journal replays are really fast on reiserfs. You can experience the speed from the moment you issue mkreiserfs on an 100GB partition, its over within a few seconds. Another awesome thing is the speed of file operations. I took me 2 secs just to delete a 700MB file. I had a valve folder which contains CS, which it deleted instantly. I was thinking that this operation would take ages like in XP/Vista... :) -- Manish Sinha Blog [ http://blog.manishsinha.net/ ] Tech Blog [ http://manishtech.wordpress.com/ ] Twitter [ http://twitter.com/ManishSinha ] -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
Hi Fabian, I need to know what is the best one to use for managing my documents and stuff. I also have files 1GB in size so there should be almost or 0% chance of data corruption. Speed is also required. Any thoughts?? Tricky question. People would swear by a file system as ideal. I have read that ext4 has zero tolerance for powerouts and much greater chance of it being corrupted in such circumstances, so it is out of question for people like me. Sincerely, Moz -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
Fabian Enos wrote: I need to know what is the best one to use for managing my documents and stuff. I also have files 1GB in size so there should be almost or 0% chance of data corruption. Speed is also required. Which FS do you use presently? I have used JFS once and didn't find it so tempting to stick forever. Apart from JFS, ext3 and reiserfs are the two others which I have used. Reiserfs: Extremely fast, the fastest I have ever seen, just that there are lots of criticisms about its data corruption. It is said that once the filesystem becomes corrupt and internal tree is unstable, then trying to improve it ever damages it furthur. Well, I havn't come across such a situation. Reiserfs also faces some criticism that due to some delayed write phenomenon, data corruption occours. i don't know much about the exact technical terminology relating to it. As of now, I wont shift to any other filesystem. I could never have thought that deleting a file of size 650MB can take only 2-3 secs. When it comes to data corruption, I never faced it till now. It happened only once, that too in JFS ( whole filesystem became unusable, probably due to my mistake ) -- Manish Sinha Blog [ http://blog.manishsinha.net/ ] Tech Blog [ http://manishtech.wordpress.com/ ] Twitter [ http://twitter.com/ManishSinha ] -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
Re: [ubuntu-in] Which is the best filesystem to use??
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Fabian Enos fabian.e...@gmail.com wrote: I need to know what is the best one to use for managing my documents and stuff. I also have files 1GB in size so there should be almost or 0% chance of data corruption. Speed is also required. What is wrong with ext3? Onkar -- ubuntu-in mailing list ubuntu-in@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
