[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Filesystem recommendations



On Saturday 24 April 2010 12:53:25 B. Alexander wrote:
> I have a question on filesystems. Back in the day, I started using reiser3.
> It was faster than ext3, and it could be extended without umounting the
> filesystem (which has since been fixed in ext3), plus, unlike any
>  filesystem I have encountered, it could be reduced in size.

I'm also a current reiser3 user.  I find the ability to shrink the filesystem 
to be something I am not willing to do without.

I have not read the rest of the thread, but my off-the-cuff recommendation 
would be to start migration to btrfs.  Now that the on-disk format has 
stabilized, I am going to start testing it for filesystems other than 
/usr/local, /var, and /home.  Assuming I can keep those running well for 6-12 
months, I will migrate /usr/local, /var, and then /home, in that order, with a 
1-3 month gap in between migrations.

It's an aggressive migration plan, but reiser3 is just barely maintained in 
the kernel, and btrfs is the only filesystem I have heard of that even 
advertises all the features I need.

I've already encountered an issue related to btrfs in my very isolated 
deployments.  The initramfs created by update-initramfs does not appear to 
mount it properly.  Instead I am given an '(initramfs)' prompt and I have to 
mount the filesystem manually (a simple two-argument mount command suffices) 
and continue the boot process.  This is fine for my laptop, but servers (and 
even my desktop) need to be able to boot unattended; I am still investigating 
the issue, which may just be due to my configuration.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: