On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 02:57:02PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 06:41:28AM +0000, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > [ snip ] > > > I'm not familiar with XFS, but reiserfs (which I usually use for large > > directories) uses a hash table to store entries. Insertion, deletion, > > and searches are therefor largely independent of directory size, and > > performance for large directories is vastly superior. > > > > I have seen reports that XFS beats both ext3 and reiserfs performance by > > a huge factor -- recent Linux Journal article on the recent 64-way SGI > > GNU/Linux server. > > XFS is a great filesystem, and seems stable on i386. However, if > you're running debian on a non-i386 platform, don't expect XFS to work > well. Really? I'd heard it was far better than (at least) reiserfs in it's non-x86 stability. Also, it's endian-safe, which reiser isn't. I've at least had people recommend it to me as the FS of choice on PPC machines. -- Rob Weir <rweir@ertius.org> http://ertius.org/
Attachment:
pgpCf3qtZztFM.pgp
Description: PGP signature