Re: xfs vs jfs performance
On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 09:54:37AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 03:53, Thedore Knab wrote:
> > I am moving away from using ext3 on my servers due to its high overhead and lower
> > performance. I am considering either XFS or JFS.
> Just curious, but why is everyone avoiding ReiserFS? I know RH dumped
> reiser in favor of ext3, but I know of hard-core RH admins who are going
> back to reiser because it worked better for them than ext3 (more
> reliability apparently, also more features like live-resize with LVM).
> I know reiser had some problems earlier, but it's had more time to knock
> the bugs out and seems fine to me now. I know XFS and JFS have a longer
> history than reiser, but not on Linux, where they are relative newbies.
One problem I had with it was that is was non-obvious how to create a
smaller journal than the default. For instance, if I have a 64 MB
root filesystem I really don't want a 32 MB journal. I'll admit that
I may not have RTFM enough, though.
I also had some problems with Reiser on sparc linux (reiser isn't
alone there; XFS and JFS also had problems). I can't recall if I ever
got the resize to work.
Nathan Norman - Incanus Networking mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Never tell people how to do things. Tell them WHAT to do and
they will surprise you with their ingenuity.
-- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.