Re: Opinions on ext3 vs XFS vs reiserfs for LAMP server
On August 23, 2007 12:31 pm Neil Gunton wrote:
> Freddie Cash wrote:
> > We use XFS for everything except /boot as GRUB doesn't play nice with
> > XFS. Haven't had any performance issues. And the resizing features
> > play nicely with LVM.
> >
> > Our servers include a pair of Xen boxes using XFS-on-LVM for each VM,
> > several web servers running Apache vhost and Linux VServers, several
> > dozen xterminal boxes supporting hundreds of diskless clients, and a
> > handful of Samba file/print servers.
> >
> > No performance issues or data corruption to worry about.
> >
> > Running Debian Sarge and Etch, using 2.6 kernels.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > We have XFS filesystems that are over 1 TB without issues. I don't
> > see how 140 GB will be an issue. :)
>
> From your experience, do you feel that XFS has significant performance
> advantages over ext3?
I haven't benchmarked the filesystems. We went with XFS after reading
through all the various benchmarks of JFS, XFS, ext3, and ReiserFS 3 that
were floating around the Internet a couple years ago. Based on those
(which showed JFS best for large files, ReiserFS best for small files,
ext3 best for those that want to migrate from ext2 without formatting,
and XFS the middle-of-the-road performer but with the best hooks into
LVM), we went with XFS.
We haven't had any complaints about slow access. And having the resizing
tools for XFS linked in with the LVM tools is nice.
--
Freddie Cash, LPIC-2 CCNT CCLP Helpdesk / Network Support Tech.
School District 73 (250) 377-HELP [377-4357]
fcash@sd73.bc.ca helpdesk@sd73.bc.ca
Reply to: