1 |
My rule of thumb: |
2 |
- its a production system -> use a FS that you are acostumed.. don't |
3 |
try out something new |
4 |
- its going to store huge/big files -> xfs |
5 |
- its going to sture lots of small files (tipical unix system) -> reiserfs |
6 |
- its going to be carelessly used (linux in a deskop system in a |
7 |
university lab.. for public usage for instance) -> ext3 |
8 |
|
9 |
I have a ftp & samba file server (our gentoo mirror is there) in a |
10 |
linux 2.6 with reiserfs, we have about 0.5TB of disk space... and a |
11 |
"regular" usage, since it's a public ftp mirror... |
12 |
|
13 |
About the filesystems, |
14 |
|
15 |
-reiserfs is fast & rock solid for what I can say, about on one dozen |
16 |
servers with diferent workloads (dns server, mail server, www server, |
17 |
DB server, desktop, firewall..etc..) in fast dual cpu servers and in |
18 |
slow ancient machines, and we never had problems.. |
19 |
reiserfs its said (and proved) to be the best when it comes to lots of |
20 |
small files. |
21 |
However, I do know of system crashes in the university campus proxy |
22 |
server (proxying a 100mbit uplink) with a raid 5 full of scsi 15krpm |
23 |
disks that were atributed to the filesystem.. (reiserfs again..) that |
24 |
machine has a huge workload all year round... cpu usage is allways |
25 |
above 60-70% ..(dual cpu system) |
26 |
|
27 |
-ext3 currently, from reiserfs, xfs and ext3 is the one wich offers |
28 |
higher data-protection... |
29 |
since it logs metadata & data while xfs, reiserfs and jfs only log metadata.. |
30 |
I use it in linux installs for campus public machines, about one |
31 |
hundred machines, reinstalled every semester .. all dual-boot |
32 |
linux/winxp .. some of the machines are quite old and unreliable, |
33 |
cases are locked but users do tend to use the reset button (no point |
34 |
in thanking that off, since they would unplug the powercable) |
35 |
Let me say that in average, 5 to 10% of the machines end up with the |
36 |
NTFS screwed, and 1% with the linux fs screwed... |
37 |
|
38 |
-xfs is the most advanced FS in tecnological features (beyond my level |
39 |
of knowledge to prove it), its also believed to be the best when it |
40 |
comes to huge file systems/huge files... basically, its the SGI |
41 |
filesystem they use for SGI supercomputers.. also its the one who |
42 |
scales best in large SMP and heavy load environments. |
43 |
|
44 |
-jfs - don't know to much about it, it's porpuse is the same has xfs, |
45 |
IBM filesystem for IBM big iron with Linux... |
46 |
|
47 |
-reiser4 (not reiserfs4 .. its name is _reiser4_) its revolutionary |
48 |
since it does not use logging but it offers better data-protection |
49 |
through the implementation on the FS level of transactions... a write |
50 |
or succeeds.. or fails... never "in between".. but is obviously not |
51 |
ready for production grade systems.. |
52 |
It also intruduces new ideas/uses and semantics to files... a file is |
53 |
both a file _and_ directory.. If reiser4 strives in linux, it will be |
54 |
groundbraking .. since its not a "standart UNIX fs"... |
55 |
|
56 |
greetings, |
57 |
|
58 |
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:33:32 -0500, Stuart Stegall |
59 |
<stuart@×××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
60 |
> I have been running 2.5 then 2.6 for two years ;) We've been using XFS as our main FS for about 18months. |
61 |
> |
62 |
> |
63 |
> |
64 |
> Christian Parpart wrote: |
65 |
> |
66 |
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2004 9:16 pm, Stuart Stegall wrote: |
67 |
> > |
68 |
> >>Anyone know if all of the x86_64 problems have been resolved? Last time I |
69 |
> >>checked, it was "working" on the platform, but didn't have performance |
70 |
> >>improvement over reiserfs3.2. |
71 |
> > |
72 |
> > |
73 |
> > ext3 is known to serve well on x86_64 - although, I'd suggest, to use kernel |
74 |
> > 2.6 over 2.4 whenever possible. |
75 |
> > I've two 1.2TB file server racks physically left to my own server at the |
76 |
> > university, both running in this configuration very well. |
77 |
> > |
78 |
> > Greetings, |
79 |
> > Christian Parpart. |
80 |
> > |
81 |
> |
82 |
> |
83 |
|
84 |
|
85 |
|
86 |
-- |
87 |
Miguel Sousa Filipe |