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

Re: fs system for desktop

On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 06:25:47PM +0530, Amit Joshi wrote:
> On Monday 11 December 2006 18:09, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > * Douglas Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> [2006 Dec 11 06:16 -0600]:
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Jeff Zhang wrote:
> > > > which fs system (jfs, xfs or future ext4) will perform better for
> > > > desktop usage under occasional power failure circumstance? like recover
> > > > from power failure and fragment after long time run.
> > > > thanks in advance!
> For recovery from power failure, XFS won't suit you cuz of its strange scaling 
> thing. 
> > >
> > > I ran into this.  I started with ext2 (the standard) which got corrupted
> > > and lost files with power failure.  Went to ext3 (ext2 + journal) which
> > > was better but __silently__ would lose files.  Went to Reiserfs which
> > > would get corrupted by reiserfsck.  Went to JFS and no more problems.
> >
> I don't know but never had any such problem with EXT3. I have been using EXT3 
> on my / partition for the last 3 years and haven't had one such problem. 
> I have had some bad experiences with JFS though, maybe cuz the HDD was 
> failing. But formatted it with XFS and it worked fine. To tell you the truth, 
> I think XFS is pretty reliable and very fast..but then I have got a UPS to 
> withstand Power failures with XFS. 
i personally use xfs on all my systems for a couple of years now and the
last fs courruption was my own fault (booting the debian system that is
also the host system exidentially im vmware with rw access to the
device... (the fs metadata was ok, some files werent...)
even some power outages or locked up kernels did not give me any
problmes so far, even though i'm aware about the potenial problem... 
(i was little scared though with that kernel bug im some 2.6.17.
kernels..., didn't do any damage to my systems though)

> So my choice for backups would still be EXT3. Again, cuz it has got more 
> number of tools written for recovery and are pretty good. 
i agree, for that purpose i have a partition mounted with
data=journal... though i have noticed that while good for fs integrity,
that ist not good for performance...

so, i can recommend xfs, though don't shoot me if anything bad happens
to you :)

Albert Dengg <a_d@gmx.at>

Reply to: