Re: Best file system
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 12:35:44PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> [2006.02.02.1157 +0100]:
> > btw, i remembered the other reason for using ext2 for /boot - GRUB
> > is happier with ext2. booting reliably no matter what version of
> > kernel or grub is installed is pretty important :)
>
> I've never had problems once grub was installed; however, getting
> grub installed when /boot is XFS is a pain. There are various bugs
> about this and no solution, e.g. #239111, 243835, #246111, #309218.
yes. it's even more of a pain when the system is a compaq dl-380 which
you're converting from redhat to debian via the 'file-system shuffle'
method (install debian on swap partition and shuffle things about until
debian ends up on the main partition). and when that server happens to
be in London, UK and you're in Melbourne, AU. and you have three more
similar machines to convert once that one has been done. i learned to
love the RILO remote console even with all its flaws, it saved my bacon
numerous times.
anyway...with a scenario like that, if you haven't already done so, you
decide "simplest is best, there's nothing to gain from having XFS on
/boot so it can be ext2" :-)
actually, i'm a firm believer in KISS so ext2 has always been my choice
for /boot. needless complication just causes problems.
craig
ps: BTW, these were the machines i also had to run mysql on. with
XFS. they ran beautifully for at least a year. moderately heavy mysql
db usage, incl. replication. also web serving and other stuff. still
running perfectly as far as i know (i finished up at that job about 3 or
4 months ago).
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> (part time cyborg)
Reply to: