On Wednesday 23 January 2008 01:21:51 pm Jeff Anderson wrote: > A very long time ago, when reiserfs was still under heavy > development, I opted to move to it rather than to move to ext3 (I was > still on ext2). It seemed like it was a good filesystem, and it never > gave me troubles. Lately, I am thinking moving off reiserfs, as it > seems development has basically stopped. There have also been a > decent number of bugs to crawl out of the reiserfs woodwork. > I am thinking about XFS, but I haven't read anything about it yet.
When ReiserFS came out before ext3, I made the move to ReiserFS. I started looking into other file systems. I didn't want to use ext3 because of its pre-allocated superblocks. That seemed like waste to me when I have a lot of large files. I wanted something journaled and I looked into XFS. I've never had a problem with XFS. It is very fast (except on deleting a lot of files at once), it is journaled, and comes with a great suite of tools. What I like best is xfs_fsr, which is a defragmenter for XFS. Yes, it is rarely needed, but when you do need it,it sure comes in handy. XFS has two drawbacks that I know of (which may not apply to all users): 1. It cannot be shrunk (it can be enlarged, however) which could pose problems with LVM. 2. It uses sector 0 of the partition, which means you can't put grub or lilo on the partition. Grub or lilo have to reside at the MBR or on another non-XFS partition. Once you know those limitations and plan accordingly, XFS is a great filesystem. -- Alberto Treviño [EMAIL PROTECTED] Testing Center Brigham Young University -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
