1 |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> Jarry wrote: |
3 |
>> |
4 |
>> Hi, |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> I'm looking for "the best" filesystem for a small multi-purpose |
7 |
>> server with a couple of services running (ftp, web, mail, mysql). |
8 |
>> For me very important features are: |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> snapshot (will be used for backup, must be native without lvm) |
11 |
>> journaling |
12 |
>> resizeable (if possible online) |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>> After a little research I have found two candidates: |
15 |
>> JFS (created by IBM) |
16 |
>> XFS (created by SGI) |
17 |
>> |
18 |
>> Now without trying to start flame-war, my question is: |
19 |
>> which of them could be better for my need? |
20 |
>> More stable, more reliable, more efficient, etc. |
21 |
>> Or should I consider some different filesystem? |
22 |
>> |
23 |
>> Jarry |
24 |
>> |
25 |
> |
26 |
> If you use XFS, make sure you have a UPS to prevent hard power offs. I used |
27 |
> XFS a good while back, every time the power would fail, it was toast. I |
28 |
> never did get it to rescue itself and ended up re-installing the OS. It may |
29 |
> have changed but that was my experience with XFS. It was fast and nice but |
30 |
> it likes normal shutdowns. |
31 |
|
32 |
My anecdotal 2 cents: |
33 |
|
34 |
For JFS, I used it on 2 systems and both were ruined by |
35 |
crash/power-failure, journal replay failed, repair caused millions of |
36 |
of JFS files to be renamed to inode number (or equally as useless |
37 |
filenames). File contents of those were basically okay, but I had no |
38 |
idea what they were or where they came from. Making an index of all |
39 |
files in your system with full path and filename, filesize and hash |
40 |
and storing it on another machine would help to match those files to |
41 |
their original names in the event of a crash. This was about 5 years |
42 |
ago so maybe JFS's crash recovery is more robust now, I don't know |
43 |
because I have avoided it ever since. |
44 |
|
45 |
I used XFS on a drive which had a bad cable and offlined itself in the |
46 |
middle of an operation, it wouldn't mount and fsck didn't fix it, |
47 |
which was scary, but using the xfs tools I was able to repair it |
48 |
enough to mount read-only and copy all my files off to another disk, |
49 |
then replaced the cable and reformatted the bad drive. So XFS got |
50 |
positive marks for being recoverable, negative marks for failing to |
51 |
recover itself. But in the end I was able to get my files in their |
52 |
original names and locations, which was better than JFS. :) |
53 |
|
54 |
Now for the past couple years I use ext4 everywhere and have suffered |
55 |
dozens of crashes and power failures without incident (laptop with |
56 |
dead battery and lack of power management, crazy nvidia-drivers |
57 |
problems on desktop machine, UPS that died during a storm...). |
58 |
|
59 |
For me, ext4 has been unbreakable so far. Fingers crossed. :) |