| 1 |
>> [...] I have no expertise to decide on that matter, |
| 2 |
>> but the fact that pretty much every linux distribution chooses ext3 by |
| 3 |
>> default suggests it is the safest (at least for simple desktop/laptop |
| 4 |
>> usage), no? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> fedora turns on 4k stack - well knowing that it kills xfs. Do you want to |
| 7 |
> rephrase your question? |
| 8 |
Well, I said I have little expertise. Won't argue. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Somewhat offtopic: |
| 11 |
>> What do you suggest for me? I care about data safety, but am too lazy |
| 12 |
>> to make frequent backups, so filesystem robustness and availability of |
| 13 |
>> data recovery tools is pretty important; |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> so use whatever you want, get a nice cheap dlt from ebay and let a cronjob |
| 16 |
> write to it. No 'lazy' problem. Very secure. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I live in Brasil, and due to huge taxes, poor infrastructure and the |
| 19 |
currency exchange ratio, computer stuff is far more expensive than in |
| 20 |
the US. And then you have to factor that the average Brazilian is much |
| 21 |
poorer than the average US citizen. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
But anyway, I know I must make backups, but I still want a robust |
| 24 |
filesystem with good software support (such as data recovery |
| 25 |
utilities). Could you give me your suggestion for the safest |
| 26 |
filesystem for a desktop user that only uses 3,8G of his 54G root |
| 27 |
partition? I care about speed, but I think that my usage pattern does |
| 28 |
not stress the filesystem (if what Valerie Henson says is true). |
Archives