| 1 |
Jarry wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I'm looking for "the best" filesystem for a small multi-purpose |
| 5 |
> server with a couple of services running (ftp, web, mail, mysql). |
| 6 |
> For me very important features are: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> snapshot (will be used for backup, must be native without lvm) |
| 9 |
> journaling |
| 10 |
> resizeable (if possible online) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> After a little research I have found two candidates: |
| 13 |
> JFS (created by IBM) |
| 14 |
> XFS (created by SGI) |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Now without trying to start flame-war, my question is: |
| 17 |
> which of them could be better for my need? |
| 18 |
> More stable, more reliable, more efficient, etc. |
| 19 |
> Or should I consider some different filesystem? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Jarry |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
If you use XFS, make sure you have a UPS to prevent hard power offs. I |
| 25 |
used XFS a good while back, every time the power would fail, it was |
| 26 |
toast. I never did get it to rescue itself and ended up re-installing |
| 27 |
the OS. It may have changed but that was my experience with XFS. It |
| 28 |
was fast and nice but it likes normal shutdowns. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Dale |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
:-) :-) |
Archives