Re: Best file system for Disk quotas and undelete
Dear Lee,
sorry for the late reply :-(
there was no office for two days.
On 5/6/05, Lee Braiden <jel@tundra.ath.cx> wrote:
> On Friday 06 May 2005 12:15, Siju George wrote:
> > actually I don't run a GUI on this machine because it is a server that
> > hosts some PHP website development.
>
> Ahh. What are you actually trying to prevent, then? Accidentally deleting
> your web projects?
>
not at all haha!!! just wanted to have an option in case something happens
> For software projects, I'd recommend getting used to a version control system
> like Subversion. Although not intended for it, version control gives you a
> backup of your most recent working copy, along with a "timeline" of backups
> covering the entire evolution of your project. Apart from that, it'll make
> lots of other software development issues easier :)
>
> If you go a little further, and backup the version control's repository
> directory, you gain not only a two-level backup system, but a backup of
> everything you've ever done on a project :)
>
Yes I'll soon implement subversion on the server :-)
> > Thanks a lot Lee for introducing Faubackup. I am going to try it. I
> > heard of another software called Bacula. How do you compare both??
> > which is better??
>
> I haven't tried bacula personally. I suspect it's more oriented towards
> larger installations of workstations and a central backup server, but I may
> be wrong. There are a number of backup options, which will mainly depend on
> the scale of your backup needs, how seriously you take the backups, and your
> willingness to be involved in the backup processes themselves.
>
> If you have multiple Debian (or Unix) machines on a secure LAN, the quickest
> way of achieving a "real" backup solution is probably to use faubackup to
> automatically backup everything to another box.
>
> > Presently I am using Ext3 is XFS better than Ext3??
>
> I'm no expert, but from what I've read of others' opinions, I would say so,
> yes. Ext3 is essentially a hack of Ext2 to gain journalling, whereas XFS has
> a long and successful history in a high-end unix operating system, with
> journalling from the beginning, afaik. To me, it's just a more professional
> filesystem.
>
> Ext3 gets a lot of good press for exactly that: being a small change to Ext2.
> Basically, it's a simple way to get journalling if you've already setup ext2,
> rather than a good long-term solution, imho. There are a few arguments for
> the reliability of ext3 (since it can use tested ext2 tools, etc.), but I
> think it's safe to say that XFS is more mature than ext3. Ext3 is pretty
> slow as well, I think.
>
> Again though, it's a matter of personal choice. Reiser does have some
> interesting qualities too: notably speed on small files and large
> directories.
>
> There are a few comparisons and benchmarks etc. available online, if you want
> to research your choice further.
>
> On the other hand, if you have Ext3 now, and it works, and your projects are
> on that filesystem... well, if it ain't broke... ;)
>
> > Will I be able to get the option to install XFS while installing from
> > the Woody 3.0r5 CD?
> > Or should I do something else to get XFS???
>
> Sarge is almost at the point of being the new Woody, and therefore probably a
> better choice than Woody. I'm not sure if it supports XFS out of the box,
> but if not, you should be able to find Sarge XFS installation images, which
> will set you up with XFS during install, as you're hoping.
>
all right Lee, thanks a lot
god luck :-)
kind regards
Siju
Reply to: