linux.inet.hr— ext3, reiserfs, xfs, jfs or vintage ext2? Please vote, so that we all have better picture of the popularity of a particular file system on Linux. It takes only a second, results available immediately.
Sep 7, 2006View in Crawl 4
Nice overview eFiniTi!Let me share few thoughts of my own. First, I'm amazed how popular is reiserfs. My own emotions with it are mixed. I've had some good and some bad experiences with it. Where "bad" includes two days worth of fscking and repairing only to get still badly corrupted file system (but at least mountable).ext3 never failed for me. It's not a speed demon, but it is very robust.xfs also fared well on my tests, I even used it for some time on my desktop, but then I noticed where all that speed comes from. xfs caches lots of data in memory, so when power fails... I decided I couldn't live with that so I turned back to ext3.I also ran some tests with jfs, but in lots of cases very simple tests revealed strange bugs in that file system, so I decided it was not ready for prime time yet. I don't know if it's any better these days, but looking at the poll results it seems not a lot of people are using it.
I use Ext3 for my home partition, as the file sizes vary too much to go for one suited to small or large files (lots of text, mp3s, movies) but I use reieserfs on my portage partition. that's all small text files, and it lets me mount the same portage tree in multiple instances on my machine (doesn't everyone have more than one install?)
You're the first person to talk about --rebuild-tree, i wonder how many of these people that complain that reiser "broke" on them didn't even try to rebuild it.
Ext3 as it is right now, I've messed with Reiser a bit, then ran into some complications and went back to ext2, and now am back on ext3. Never gave me a problem with the Debian-based systems I've had.
Oh, sorry. I wasn't implying that it performed BETTER.What I meant was it still isn't disfunctional.Sounds like you have some huge stuff going on there, perhaps it is out of reiser AND ext's leagues? :D
It depends on your DBMS if you're a company, and what kind of files you're hosting.ReiserFS seems the best overall for performance so far, but it's a little unstable.
zlatkoSep 7, 2006Submitter
Nice overview eFiniTi!Let me share few thoughts of my own. First, I'm amazed how popular is reiserfs. My own emotions with it are mixed. I've had some good and some bad experiences with it. Where "bad" includes two days worth of fscking and repairing only to get still badly corrupted file system (but at least mountable).ext3 never failed for me. It's not a speed demon, but it is very robust.xfs also fared well on my tests, I even used it for some time on my desktop, but then I noticed where all that speed comes from. xfs caches lots of data in memory, so when power fails... I decided I couldn't live with that so I turned back to ext3.I also ran some tests with jfs, but in lots of cases very simple tests revealed strange bugs in that file system, so I decided it was not ready for prime time yet. I don't know if it's any better these days, but looking at the poll results it seems not a lot of people are using it.
thedanielSep 8, 2006
bleargh.<a class="user" href="http://www.ok-cancel.com/comic/137.html">http://www.ok-cancel.com/comic/137.html</a> is how i feel about this poll.
jacobmar1eySep 8, 2006
I use Ext3 for my home partition, as the file sizes vary too much to go for one suited to small or large files (lots of text, mp3s, movies) but I use reieserfs on my portage partition. that's all small text files, and it lets me mount the same portage tree in multiple instances on my machine (doesn't everyone have more than one install?)
Closed AccountSep 8, 2006
File system? I don't have no stinking files.
scrubadubSep 8, 2006
You're the first person to talk about --rebuild-tree, i wonder how many of these people that complain that reiser "broke" on them didn't even try to rebuild it.
neosnightmareSep 8, 2006
Ext3 as it is right now, I've messed with Reiser a bit, then ran into some complications and went back to ext2, and now am back on ext3. Never gave me a problem with the Debian-based systems I've had.
aznboi04kSep 8, 2006
can anyone tell me the advantage and disadvantage of each partition type? which partition should i use for basic linux desktop?
sniperslapSep 8, 2006
Oh, sorry. I wasn't implying that it performed BETTER.What I meant was it still isn't disfunctional.Sounds like you have some huge stuff going on there, perhaps it is out of reiser AND ext's leagues? :D
jacks0nSep 9, 2006
It depends on your DBMS if you're a company, and what kind of files you're hosting.ReiserFS seems the best overall for performance so far, but it's a little unstable.
tfejosDec 29, 2006
Raiser is very risky now.