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

Re: Re: ext3 on woody safe for a production machine?



On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 07:42:30AM -0600, Robert L. Harris wrote:
> 
> 
> Has XFS gone read-write?  Last I heard it was still very experimental
> and read only in the kernel.
It has a revision > 1.0 and read-write support for quite some time now

See URL in my previous mail for more info
> 
> Thus spake Paolo Falcone (fallenlordx@edsamail.com.ph):
> 
> > 
> > Alson van der Meulen wrote:
> > 
> > >On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 11:49:45AM +0200, Johann Spies wrote:
> > >> I am a newbie ftp-administrator trying to build a new ftp-server for
> > >> our university.
> > >> 
> > >> Setup:
> > >> 
> > >> Compaq Proliant 3700
> > >> Redhat 7.1 (currently with 2.4.9 kernel)
> > >> Three other machines each with 4x40g IDE hard disks.  They are Enbd
> > >> servers with the Compaq as client.  The Compaq as ftp-server then use
> > >> the nbd-devices as storage giving us just less than 480G of space.
> > >> 
> > >> While testing the software and hardware we had the following problems
> > >> so far:
> > >> 
> > >> Kernel unstability with 2.4.9-ac3, ac16 and ac18 and some of 
> > >> unstability using reiserfs on the nbd-devices. We did not determine
> > >> whether the problem was on the kernel's side or from reiserfs in
> > >> combination with nbd.
> > >> 
> > >> Now I want to try ext3 on the nbd-devices.  The reason is that
> > >> fsck'ing the 12 nbd-devices takes a lot of time.  A journalling file
> > >> system can help. I have 6 unofficial woody CD's and I see that
> > >> ext3-utilities are part of woody (which is not the case with Redhat
> > >> 7.1 which most of the machines here use).  
> > >> 
> > >> What are the experiences in this group with woody and ext3?  Would you
> > >> recommend it for a setup like ours?
> > >I use it at home, works fine. Didn't stress test it though. I guess it's
> > >quite stable since it's mainly based on ext2, which is around for quite
> > >some time.
> > >
> > >Have you considdered XFS yet? It's comparable with reiserfs regarding
> > >speed (and like reiserfs faster than ext[23] for some operations). IIRC
> > >XFS' main purpose was for file servers. I don't know how stable XFS is
> > >though.
> > >more info: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/
> > >
> > >A file system benchmark with XFS, Reiserfs and ext2 (performance nearly
> > >same as ext3): http://bulmalug.net/body.phtml?nIdNoticia=642
> > 
> > Yes, go for XFS if you want a filesystem that handles big files 
> > satisfactorily (beats reiserfs when used with very big database files,
> > as reiserfs goes best with _many_ small files as opposed to a few
> > _very big_ files). I use reiserfs just for my /home partition, while
> > the others are in XFS (so I can easily delete unwanted users, since
> > reiserfs deletes very fast).
> > 
> > Paolo Alexis Falcone
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > www.edsamail.com
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 
> 
> :wq!
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Robert L. Harris                |  Micros~1 :  
> Senior System Engineer          |    For when quality, reliability 
>   at RnD Consulting             |      and security just aren't
>                                 \_       that important!
> DISCLAIMER:
>       These are MY OPINIONS ALONE.  I speak for no-one else.
> FYI:
>  perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);'
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-- 
,-------------------------------------------.
> Name:           Alson van der Meulen      <
> Personal:        alson@flutnet.org        <
> School:       alson@gymnasiumleiden.nl    <
`-------------------------------------------'
What do you mean /home was on that disk? I umounted it!
---------------------------------------------



Reply to: