On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi, On Samstag, 12. März 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:ext3 is inefficient for large files since it uses simple block bitmaps.how inefficient is it? how large?
Depends on what you do with it, but some things like deleting a large file (1-100GB) can take several seconds to minutes on ext3, yet be instant with xfs. Same thing for mkfs for instance.
And xfs can be a bit smarter about file layout that might get a bit better performance if you have several streaming reads/writes at the same time, but that's minor optimisation.
At work we store a couple of PB on xfs, in filesystems of about 5-30TB each. Filesizes here all the way up to 40GB.
What put me off from using xfs or reiserfs were quite frequent stories about data loss with those filesystems (which I see until today). I rather have my data served slower, but reliable.
Never really heard much about data loss on xfs that didn't have external explanations - I even have very good experience with xfs_repair when hardware failed badly. Reiserfs I wouldn't touch again thogh.
/Mattias Wadenstein