| 1 |
William Kenworthy wrote: |
| 2 |
> I find filesystems are very much a case of YMMV :) |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I will NOT use an ext fs again willingly - lost too many whole systems, |
| 5 |
> corruption - Ive had less problems with DOS! |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Reiserfs, has had its "moments" but is by far the most stable system, |
| 8 |
> though NTFS isnt bad these days either. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> btrfs - I am using this for backups systems and under a cephfs rbd store |
| 11 |
> for VM's. Not bad ... but definitely not stable though its months since |
| 12 |
> I have lost a whole system ... I am also using it as the primary file |
| 13 |
> system on an apple macbook air (ssd) and for the OS on an ssd for a vm |
| 14 |
> server host and its been problem free on both. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> BillK |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I think Alan said it best but I just can't resist sharing this: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
http://blogs.computerworld.com/15413/the_best_linux_file_system_of_all |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
That is about Google switching all their servers to . . . . ext4. This |
| 24 |
is like asking which brand of hard drive is best. No matter who it is, |
| 25 |
every single person has had at least one drive fail and will never use |
| 26 |
that brand again. lol |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Just for giggles. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Dale |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
:-) :-) |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! |
Archives