| 1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday 02 September 2008 19:05:53 Michael Sullivan wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 15:39 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> On Dienstag, 2. September 2008, Michael Sullivan wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> Can someone please explain to me what's going on with /dev/sda6? I |
| 9 |
>>>> couldn't log into GNOME after my reboot yesterday, and when I asked for |
| 10 |
>>>> a df listing in the console, I got this. Shouldn't there be 4GB |
| 11 |
>>>> available? |
| 12 |
>>>> |
| 13 |
>>>> camille ~ # df -h |
| 14 |
>>>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on |
| 15 |
>>>> /dev/sda6 78G 74G 0G 100% / |
| 16 |
>>>> udev 10M 184K 9.9M 2% /dev |
| 17 |
>>>> /dev/sda7 52G 40G 12G 78% /mnt/store |
| 18 |
>>>> shm 247M 0 247M 0% /dev/shm |
| 19 |
>>>> catherine:/backup 44G 34G 8.5G 80% /backup/catherine |
| 20 |
>>>> |
| 21 |
>>> you have space left, but the inodes are all used up. |
| 22 |
>>> |
| 23 |
>>> Typical problem for fs like extX. |
| 24 |
>>> |
| 25 |
>> What fs should I use instead? For future reference what's the current |
| 26 |
>> standard? |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> There isn't one, you get to use whatever filesystem and layout you feel will |
| 30 |
> get the job done best for you. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> You might as well ask what's the current recommended standard 4-wheeled |
| 33 |
> vehicle (i.e. car) for a family |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
I use JFS. It's a heck of a lot faster than extX to run a file system |
| 36 |
check on I've never run into any problems with inodes, and it's fast to |
| 37 |
create/delete files. The vehicle analogy works best, because it really |
| 38 |
is to each their own when it comes to file systems. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Here are some file system benchmarks: |
| 41 |
http://fsbench.netnation.com/ |
| 42 |
http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388 |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
And for the graphically represented results people: |
| 45 |
http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/old/?section=projects&item=fs_contest2 |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
To make a long read short: |
| 48 |
JFS is less CPU intensive than most other file systems, faster to |
| 49 |
create, check, and unmount; however, it's not as fast as others |
| 50 |
(ReiserFS being the main one) when it comes to a large directory/file |
| 51 |
structure. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
-Hal |
| 55 |
> :-) |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
Archives