Re: Ext3 or XFS (or none)?
#include <hallo.h>
nate wrote on Tue Jul 09, 2002 um 02:22:05PM:
> i reccomend reiserfs. i use it because its compadible with 2.2.x
> kernels which i use. ext3 i think is in alpha for 2.2.x kernels
> at best last i checked, and xfs not supported at all.
Ext3 in 2.2.x was pretty useable. And ReiserFS for 2.2.x uses Format-3.5
which is known to be less stable and limited features (2GB filesize
limit, for example). Create a Reiser filesystem with newer kernel and
you cannot read it with 2.2.x, only if you specify format-3.5
explicitely when doing mkreiserfs.
> reiserfs is from what i've seen the most mature linux journalling
> filesystem. XFS has been around a long time on IRIX but its a newbie
> to linux still. The only downside to reiserfs is i think it lacks
> bad block support, so if you use crappy hard disks like IBM 75GXP
> you may have some trouble from time to time. ext3 is ok, but
> i'd really only use it if migration was impossible by moving
> to a fresh filesystem rather then converting an existing one.
ReiserFS is not perfect. I tried it for reading of average system
directories (/usr, mixture of large and small files). It sucked - needed
almost 200 percent more time to for reads.
> but my main reason for using it is it is stable on 2.2.x kernels,
Really? Look for data-fuckage reports on Deja.
> i've been using reiserfs under 2.2.19 for about 13-14 months now,
> on about a dozen different systems.
>
> when 2.4 is more of a stable platform(not changing as much) maybe
> around the start of '03 i'll start testing it and migrate some
> systems .......(hoping)
Weird... you are keen on stability but use ReiserFS...
Gruss/Regards,
Eduard.
--
"640K ought to be enough for anybody" -Bill Gates, 1981
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: