Debian Planet










Welcome to Debian Planet

Search

All your woody are (not quite, but very very very soon) belong to us.
Main Menu

  • Home

  • Topics

  • Web Links

  • Your Account

  • Submit News

  • Stats

  • Top 10

  • Debian

    These are important Debian sites one should not be without!

  • Official Debian site

  • Package search

  • Mailing list archives

  • Bug reports

  • Debian on CD

  • Unofficial woody CD ISOs

  • Unofficial APT sources

  • Developers' Corner

    Other great Debian news sources:

  • Debian Weekly News

  • Kernel Cousin Debian

    (Debian mailing lists digested)
  • Community Groups

    Need help? You're not alone on this planet.

  • debianHELP

    (User support site)

  • Debian International

  • DebianForum.de

    (Deutsch)

  • EsDebian

    (español)

  • DebianWorld

    (français)

  • MaximumDebian

    (Italiano)

  • DebianUsers

    (Korean)

  • Debian-BR

    (Português)

  • IRC

    The place to get help on a Debian problem (after reading docs) or to just chat and chill is #debian on irc.debian.org.

    Many of the Debian Planet staff live there so pop by and say hello.

    Wanna write?

    Got that latest or greatest scoop? Perhaps you have some important news for the Debian community? Submit a news item!

    Or perhaps you've written a rather ground breaking insight into some aspect of Debian and you feel compelled to share it with others? Knock up a longer editorial article and send it to the editors.

    Sponsorship

    DP is sponsored by Xinit Systems and kieser.net.

    Domains paid for and hosted by uklinux.net.

    Buy your Debian merchandise at DebianShop.com.

    Who's Online

    There are currently, 92 guest(s) and 5 member(s) that are online.

    You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here.

      
    Which file system to use with Debian?
    Contributed by joeg on Wednesday, March 20 @ 18:47:16 GMT

    File Systems
    With all of the recent file system related posts over the past few months, I figured I would ask the question. Which file system do you use with Debian. I am currently putting together a few new file servers which will run Debian. Each sever will have about 120 gigs of important data, and I don't plan on making many changes to these systems for a long time. So,. is one file system more reliable then the others? It seems fairly difficult now to choose due to the wide choice of ext2, ext3, JFS, XFS and ReiserFS. Any suggestions?

     
    Related Links

  • ReiserFS (NAMESYS)
  • Ext3 (Stephen Tweedie)
  • JFS (IBM)
  • Linux XFS (SGI)
  • More about File Systems
  • News by rob

    Most read story about File Systems:
    Filesystems - Part I

    Last news about File Systems:

    Printer Friendly Page  Send this Story to a Friend
  • "Which file system to use with Debian?" | Login/Create Account | 59 comments
    Threshold


    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 2, Informative)
    by kveton (scott-at-kveton-dot-com) on Wednesday, March 20 @ 19:22:47 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.kveton.com

    I had the same question about this a month or so

    ago and did some tests with ext2, ext3 and ReiserFS.

    Check out

    http://www.net.oregonstate.edu/~kveton/fs


    for the results. Basically, ReiserFS is the best

    solution out of those at this time.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by hildeb on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:01:28 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.arschkrebs.de/

    This benchmark is worthless.

    ext3 does not only journal metadata (like ReiserFS), but in it's default mode

    it wait's until all userdata is written to disk BEFOREW committing the metadata

    To have similar behaviour, ext3 must use "data=writeback", which uses

    metadata journalling ONLY.

    Also: Keep in mind that ReiserFS gets patches all the time. The code simply is unreliable, changes all the time. KISS. And ext3 is clearly the simplest solution

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by Bklyn on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:19:12 GMT
    (User Info)

    Reiser also had horrible problems with being exported via NFS in some older 2.4.x (<=12 maybe?) revisions. Even if the export was read-only, the filesystem would get corrupted and/or kick out errors in kern.log. I still have some reiser partitions, mostly for lack of space to convert them, but I much prefer ext3 also. The tools (e.g. e2fsck, tune2fs) are better and the design more mature.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 27 @ 18:52:56 GMT

    Agreement, same opinion, experience and lack of space here.

    reiserfsck gave me the first partition with total corruption in 14 years using hard disks.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by kveton (scott-at-kveton-dot-com) on Thursday, March 21 @ 15:50:31 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.kveton.com

    Actually, its not. So I re-did some of these tests as per the above comment (the user actually sent me some email) and the conclusions remained the same.

    As I said in my email to this person, use whatever filesystem you want. I took filesystems readily available in the latest "stable" kernel and ran tests on the same hardware with no fancy tricks. ReiserFS was the fastest of filesystems I tested. If/when ext3 matures and is faster ... I'll use it ....

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 15:37:41 GMT

    A pretty hasty jump to conclusions here... I agree that Reiser is a good solution out of those, but I still prefer XFS which wasn't even in the comparison.

    I use XFS but at home and at work on our production servers. I'm very happy with XFS. The biggest problem with XFS is that it's not part of the main kernel.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 18:29:18 GMT

    If you want something reliable I would use FFS with softupdates.

    [ Reply ]


    Debian on NetBSD will give you FFS+softupdates (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 18:33:49 GMT

    Use one of the BSDs.

    If you need Debian (why?) you can use Debian on NetBSD, o/w just use OpenBSD.

    Check www.netcraft.com for servers with longest uptime = BSD.

    BTW, this is posted from Woody on XFS, but that's a laptop.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Debian on NetBSD will give you FFS+softupdates (Score: 1)
    by abo on Friday, March 22 @ 00:27:48 GMT
    (User Info) http://sourceforge.net/users/abo/

    Uptime wars are stupid. longest uptime often = least well supported.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Debian on NetBSD will give you FFS+softupdates (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Sunday, March 24 @ 14:42:55 GMT

    > Uptime wars are stupid. longest uptime often = least well supported.

    You're right at least in my experience. I have one linux router that's been up for quite a long time now. Basically all it does is routing traffic and collecting dust. It doesn't need a whole lot of maintenance, it just needs to work.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Debian on NetBSD will give you FFS+softupdates (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, April 05 @ 19:27:09 BST

    Hey /. uses several Debian servers and a BSD firewall 🙂 If Debian is good enough for them its good enough for me.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by ironstorm on Wednesday, March 20 @ 19:40:29 GMT
    (User Info)

    I have been running ReiserFS for about a year...

    2 out of 3 boxes I run have had FS problems, not sure if that is because of flaky hard drives or if it's Reiser, but the 3rd has been solid.

    Last weekend I used the XFS net intall CD and built out a Linux system on a new HDD, so far I'm impressed, I have noticed a speed up in disk I/O...

    I've heard several people mention that XFS is needed if you want to use Samba with full Windows file ACLs... you mentioned something about file sharing. (the release notes for Mandrake 8.2 also say this)

    I would say go with XFS or ext3, IMO JFS is not ready to go and I've had a bit of bad luck w/ systems running on Rieser (though YMMV).

    -Ironstorm

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by hildeb on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:02:39 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.arschkrebs.de/

    Definitely. JFS has sucked bigtime in c't recent test (a big German mag).

    JFS was the only FS that was thrashed by their stress test.

    Nothing I'd like to run a production server.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by Paran0id on Thursday, March 21 @ 19:14:27 GMT
    (User Info)

    New file systems will have more bugs.

    Both the JFS team and a few people have tried to repeat the stress tests and nobody was able to trigger a hang until Christoph Hellwig start building JFS as module. There are obviously bugs.

    This is the same reason why I would avoid XFS: not only it introduce a file system, it introduces changes to the main kernel tree.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by joeg on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:07:37 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.joeg.net

    Hmmm I will need to make some shares for windows machines.. so I guess XFS won't be the most reliable solution, and after talking with a few people maybe not Reiserfs either.. Looks like Ext3 might be a smart choice?! Anybody know if there are plans to have the default filesystem ext3 anytime soon (now that redhat and (i think?) mandrake are choosing ext3 by default..)? Or perhaps another question.. is there any way to reliably convert these filesystems to another (a la fat -> fat32 ntfs) without backing up, format, restore?

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1, Informative)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:53:07 GMT

    The good thing with ext2 and ext3 is that they are interchangeable. You just boot from floppy or some other media that lets you operate on your hard drive without mounting it, and then you do

    tune2fs -j /dev/hdXX

    for each partition on each drive you want to convert. You can then:

    • Mount the partitions as ext3.
    • Mount the partitions as ext2, provided that they were correctly unmounted when they were mounted as ext3.

    That way, this is more or less perfect. Also, ext3 has been quite stable (at least this is my experience, YMMV), and the operation of ext2 is very well known because it has been around for so long.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 2, Insighful)
    by tj on Wednesday, March 20 @ 22:32:02 GMT
    (User Info) http://shakti.tky.hut.fi

    I converted all my ext2 partitions to ext3 while they were mounted.

    tune2fs -j /dev/xxx
    vi /etc/fstab
    s/ext2/ext3/g
    reboot

    And it was done. Dunno if that's wise thing to do but worked for me with no data loss 🙂

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by Martijn on Wednesday, March 20 @ 23:03:44 GMT
    (User Info) http://zap.to/martijn

    I worked with reiserfs for quite a while, but got into trouble (file corruption) recently. The problem was bad RAM memory though, so I guess reiserfs is not to blame for that.

    My home computer now has ext3. Now, I thought ext3 should get rid of those horrible fsck's when mounting for the 20th time or so. I'm quite sure reiserfs doesn't need fsck's. Can someone explain whether ext3 indeed still needs time consuming fsck's and reiserfs does not?

    Thanks,

    Martijn

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1, Informative)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 00:32:48 GMT

    Yes, you have to manually remove checks every 20 times and 180 days. It is very simple: tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/hdX

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 02:13:25 GMT

    they all need fsck, just the fsck time is much shorter now.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 19:00:10 GMT

    Had a look at XFS's fsck ? It just return 0;. So, it does not need fsck. It repairs automatically. (though, xfs_repair exist).

    Here is my advice on the original question: I've been using ext2, XFS, and ReiserFS. I've been using ReiserFS on about 85 machines for a year or so, and about 7-8 machines - including mine - have had problems. Reading #debian (@OPN), and other big channels, and hearing my friends, it seems I'm not the only one. Furthermore, there are regularly important bugfixes in ChangeLogs - though I understand that ReiserFS is more tested since it is in the kernel, so there are more bugs discovered..

    I now use XFS. For multiple reasons: first, the performances are very good. Better than ext2 and ext3, of course, but also better than ReiserFS for several operations - especially on big files. Though, ReiserFS is still the best for performances on a big number of small files. It also has quota support, ACL support, works fine with Samba, has dump support.

    It is also *very* stable, and I haven't had any problem with it - even in a big disk crash recently - which broke my ext2 partition (well, actually, 90% of the files are in lost+found, but the filenames aren't good any more..), a bit of my ReiserFS partition - some links and files gone - but didn't do anything bad to my XFS partitions - although they were mounted on /, /usr, .., which had just to be xfs_repair'ed.

    I personally prefer XFS. Though, ext3 can be a good choice because you just need to use tune2fs -j, as said before.

    --

    Manuel Menal

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by eckes on Saturday, March 23 @ 17:40:28 GMT
    (User Info)

    On the performance site, one should note that it depends on the usage pattern. ext3 has surprising good results with databases and ReiserFS is about to catch up on large files. Remeber the Linux Journal Article. It showed that Reiser is pretty bad for the Index Operation of Database Systems like Oracle. Unfortunatelly XFS was not tested.

    http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=5841

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 15:32:59 GMT

    That's the thing about ext3 that's so damn handy. I managed to convert my home partition on a remote machine I share with a bunch of friends (and that I've never actually seen) over an ssh link from ext2 to ext3 without a problem, and without a reboot. It would probably have been considerably more difficult to move to reiserfs. (Besides, I've had my share of problems with reiserfs too, although I hear it can be trusted nowadays.)

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1, Insighful)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 20 @ 23:38:42 GMT

    Agreed. ext3 definitely.

    It's the easiest to convert to. Really all you're doing is building a journal on your ext2 partition and mounting it as ext3 instead.

    ...and as long as it's cleanly unmounted, you can mount it as ext2 (if you need to boot an old kernel or whatever).

    Any other journalling fs will have to show an impressive performance increase in order to eclipse the ease/compatibility of ext3.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by eckes on Tuesday, March 26 @ 04:28:37 GMT
    (User Info)

    Don't you want to have a reason for testing/exercisig backup/restore from bare metal? Actually I did with a little help from a DAT Streamer, but thanks to LVM1 I was able to convert most of my filesyste into logical ones inline, by shifting around some smaller partitions.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 12:06:48 GMT

    I had reiser in my home machine in two SCSI disks. everything was fine until...

    a bad block apeared in one of the units. luckly it was not on the root fs. I backed up the units and formated with ext3.

    reiserfs has almost no bad block handling, and some 2.4.x kernel will panic if a bad block is found in a reiserfs volume.

    If you have important data to keep, go with ext3. since it's backward compatible with ext2 it'll be much easier to find recovery tools to rescue a volume with bad blocks.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by joeg on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:11:06 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.joeg.net

    To clarify this question.. I am actually more concerned with reliablity and (future) compatibility of the filesystem that will be housing this data.. dunno if that changes anybodys reply?

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 20 @ 20:52:48 GMT

    i had reiserfs on my box....but now i have ext3

    i rebooted during startup and it corrupted my partition table. i hadn't printed out the fdisk -l info and couldn't restore the partitions. there are many tools that support ext2 (and, therefore ext3), but i couldn't find any that supported reiserfs.

    so now i use ext3.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 2, Insighful)
    by JoeBuck (jbuck at welsh-buck dot org) on Thursday, March 21 @ 00:30:51 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.welsh-buck.org/jbuck/

    If your primary concern is reliability and future
    compatibility, I recommend being uncool and sticking
    with ext2. It's mature, tested, and works.
    Since you've said that you expect this data to
    rarely change, journaling for better recovery after
    crashes becomes much less important.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 06:16:40 GMT

    ext3 is basically ext2 + journaling extensions. It has the same reliability and performance not to mention compatibility, but gives the added bonus of journaling in case of an unwanted system failure.

    So there is no logical reason to choose ext2 over ext3 unless you have something constructive to do during an fsck.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by xsdg on Monday, March 25 @ 19:54:30 GMT
    (User Info)

    I concur. Additionally, (unless you're running an infrequently-changing DB or something), you can probably just mount r/o and not worry about corruption until you need to modify the data.

    --xsdg

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 2, Insighful)
    by ex-bart on Wednesday, March 20 @ 21:32:37 GMT
    (User Info)

    For a long time I used ReiserFS and for some time now together with lvm. Here are the pros and cons I encountered:

    Pro:

    • Together with lvm it's really easy to add new diskspace: Shutdown the machine, plugin disk, boot up again and your back in service. Now while the machine is running and in service you partition the new disk, create new physical volumes, add them to the volume group, enlarge the logical volume with reiserfs on it and finally enlarge the filesysem itself. All that while the filesystem is up an running.

      Other filesystems probably also allow online enlarging, but I haven't checked.

    • Besides the one problem below that I caused myself, I don't remember any Problems with reiserfs.

    Contra:

    • I once made the mistake of using hdparm -X68 on a controller which doesn't support it. As a result I broke the journal on my root-filesystem and reiserfs refused to mount it after reboot. After doing reiserfsck from a rescue cd some inodes were located somewhere beyond the partition and every stat or rm -f on the corresponding files failed.

      With at least ext2 it was possible to boot read-only, and I have never encountered any strange leftovers.

    • Reducing the size of reiserfs can only be done offline. And it's sort of difficult to figure out how big it is in the end, that is, how small you can make your partition or logical volume. I don't know if any of the other filesystems does a better job here.

    As you don't want to change that much on your system the points about resizing probably don't bother you. Reiserfsck was a bit flaky, but on the other hand you have to be a bit creative to break reiserfs enough that you have to use it. I only had to use it the one time described above.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by Wouter_Oosterveld on Wednesday, March 20 @ 23:54:25 GMT
    (User Info)

    Since about a year, I've been happily using XFS and ext3 on my Debian Woody system. I use XFS primarily for my data and home partitions and ext3 for my system partitions. Now the XFS rescuedisks have appeared, I might convert all partitions to XFS. The performance is excellent and I haven't had a single reliability problem in a year of heavy use. To be honest, I haven't given JFS and Reiser a good try yet, and I'm not planning to do so in the nearby future....

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by opk on Thursday, March 21 @ 16:48:19 GMT
    (User Info)

    This is exactly what I now do - ext3 for the system and xfs for all my data. I've been very impressed by both. I had problems with Reiserfs in that past when I used Mandrake. XFS is always quoted as being fastest for large files but it seems noticably faster to me than Reiser was on my MH mailboxes - directories containing thousands of small files. I think they rushed things to get Rieserfs to be first in the official kernel. I wouldn't bother with jfs unless I was using IBM hardware and wanted to read discs from AIX but I don't know much about it.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 3, Insighful)
    by QT on Thursday, March 21 @ 08:24:28 GMT
    (User Info)

    A filesystem comparison test in the current issue of c't (a big german mag) revealed that:

    - XFS is the perfomance winner

    - ext3 is the data integrity and compatability winner

    JFS seems to be unusable at the moment - at least on PRODUCTION machines.

    The biggest issue with XFS though is that it is not integrated in the kernel tree yet and that patching the kernel sources for XFS support isn't the easiest job to do.

    Personally I have systems with LVM/ReiserFS and other boxes with LVM/ext3. Never had any problem with either of them, but for the future I would always opt for ext3. I just installed that one box with ReiserFS because at that time it was the only journaling FS available in the standard kernel (without patching). In the meantime ext3 is there and I would always opt for that until XFS makes its way into the official kernel source.

    bye

    QT

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 27 @ 18:44:52 GMT

    - XFS is the perfomance winner
    - ext3 is the data integrity and compatability winner

    On one of my machines ReiserFS is running fine for more than a year. On another I had a reset caused by power failure. Reboot was fast, but the last and long edited text file contained trash only - a journal just to get trash faster is not a real good thing, IMHO. Integrity should be the main goal of a FS.

    The compatability of ext3 makes live much easier.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by Pflipp on Thursday, March 21 @ 11:31:06 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.hobbiton.org/~pflipp/

    I had ext2 until a crappy network card caused an incredible amount of failure. Since then my system hasn't been 100% stable anymore. It just hangs sometimes, even in the BIOS.

    In between the failures I managed to compile a kernel with ext3 support. I still have crappy hardware, but rebooting has stopped to be such a pain in the ass.

    The 2.4.17 & 2.4.18 kernels don't seem to be completely perfect. Sometimes the system hangs and I don't _know_ if I have to blame the hardware or the software. Also, sometimes after the "mounted more than 20 times" thing, fsck finds some errors. But over the whole the situation is very agreeable to me. No more fscking just because I have crappy hardware 🙂

    Pflipp

    [ Reply ]


    Hardware not Software (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 04:49:11 GMT

    I would suggest changing your ram first, then other components. If it still sucks, reinstall bits at a time. But it still sounds hardware related.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Hardware not Software (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Saturday, March 23 @ 14:33:18 GMT

    I would suggest running ram tests (i don't remember the name but there are good GPL utilities to do heavy RAM stability tests) before doing anything.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 21:07:46 GMT

    Your netword card hangs the BIOS and you don't know if you have to blame the hardware or the sotware?

    Silly thing.

    I had an otherwise rock solid system that only hanged because of the crapy VIA PCI chipset.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 @ 12:32:14 GMT

    I like how the woody disk are now with ext3 and Reiser FS as options. Ive run Reiser FS for some time on 4 systems and never once had a prolbem with it. with my older hardware preformance means everything.

    [ Reply ]


    TERRIBLE performance with XFS for me (Score: 1)
    by cowbird on Thursday, March 21 @ 22:42:31 GMT
    (User Info)

    I have had XFS installed under Debian for a few weeks now, and am getting very poor performance under heavy IO. Basically, if I am downloading a large file or using apt-get, kupdated takes over and uses 99% of the CPU. Thsi results in a complete loss of interaction with the GUI.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: TERRIBLE performance with XFS for me (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 13:58:51 GMT

    I had a similar problem. Make sure DMA is enabled on the drive. That cleared it up for me.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: TERRIBLE performance with XFS for me (Score: 1)
    by cowbird on Friday, March 22 @ 14:36:29 GMT
    (User Info)

    That's what I thought, but look at my hdparms:

    /dev/hda:

    multcount = 16 (on)

    I/O support = 3 (32-bit w/sync)

    unmaskirq = 1 (on)

    using_dma = 1 (on)

    keepsettings = 0 (off)

    nowerr = 0 (off)

    readonly = 0 (off)

    readahead = 8 (on)

    geometry = 3649/255/63, sectors = 58633344, start = 0

    busstate = 1 (on)

    That should be good, right?

    [ Reply ]


    Re: TERRIBLE performance with XFS for me (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 23:11:10 GMT

    man hdparm


    -c Query/enable (E)IDE 32-bit I/O support. A numeric parameter can be used to enable/disable 32-bit I/O support: Currently supported values include 0 to disable 32-bit I/O support, 1 to enable 32-bit data transfers, and 3 to enable 32-bit data transfers with a special sync sequence required by many chipsets. The value 3 works with nearly all 32-bit IDE chipsets, but incurs slightly more overhead. Note that "32-bit" refers to data transfers across a PCI or VLB bus to the interface card only; all (E)IDE drives still have only a 16-bit connection over the ribbon cable from the interface card.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: TERRIBLE performance with XFS for me (Score: 1)
    by eckes on Saturday, March 23 @ 17:34:55 GMT
    (User Info)

    what kernel are you using, some are known to perform realy bad.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: TERRIBLE performance with XFS for me (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 26 @ 02:34:42 GMT

    What chipset are you using?

    What DMA does it support?

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by carney1979 on Friday, March 22 @ 01:15:14 GMT
    (User Info)

    ext3. I've lost too many systems with ext2 when "the lights went out". Keep meaning to buy that UPS.....;-)

    I've heard of weird cross-linking of files with reiserfs, so I tried ext3. Lost power once a few times, rebooted absolutely flawlessly when power came back on. Can't ask for more. Performance seems on par (at least) with ext2.

    Good luck!

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 10:07:24 GMT

    I'd like to see XFS in Linux (and Debian).

    The feature i like most are the ACLs in XFS, which are regretable not useable in Linux up to date...

    But that is s.th. i miss in Unix for a long time now.

    And even Windoze has it... 🙁

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 22 @ 11:52:35 GMT

    XFS.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Saturday, March 23 @ 15:24:46 GMT

    reiserfs

    I have 1 at home and 4 at work. 2 are alphas, the rest intels. no problems, just a bit tricky setting them up.

    don't worry as much about power outage or lockups which are rare anyway, but adding reiserfs/journaling is sort of like doing backups, it adds another layer of security and stability.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 1)
    by eckes on Tuesday, March 26 @ 04:33:21 GMT
    (User Info)

    Especially in the case of Reiser the journal is not something "additional". Reiser was especially bad known for the poor recovery tools.

    The XFS tools are pretty major and you can recover from all problems. If reiser has some instablke state, your data is pretty much lost. Those problems seems to get fixed by Reiser's team now, but every now and then a new problem occurs. Much more problems than ext2 or XFS ever had.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Saturday, March 23 @ 21:57:31 GMT

    I have EXT3, ReisferFS and EXT2 partitions on my boxen.

    Support them all! And lvm!

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Sunday, March 24 @ 21:46:05 GMT

    I use ReiserFS on 27 desktop machines in a lab, I had one corruption on one of their filesystems (it was fixable with reiserfsck); they are in production since October.
    I also use reiserfs+LVM on four other serverish-desktopish machines; being able to do online resize like AIX is pretty good. No problems so far.
    Also, Maildir performance: the noatime mount option helps a lot.
    ext3 is probably better for database software, with a few big files.
    xfs: few years ago I had severe problems with it under IRIX, so I'm afraid of it. dunno..

    [ Reply ]


    I think it's about upgrading, not fresh install (Score: 1)
    by kipple on Monday, March 25 @ 07:39:23 GMT
    (User Info)

    I have a few production systems (RAID-5 for mail server, a couple of firewalls) all with ext3.

    It's not about fresh installing: suppose I had them for a while with ext2, and now I want to use a better filesystem. How can I afford some downtime to reformat the partitions with Reiser? Better have a slightly less fast disk i/o but

    1. can boot with ext2 just in case

    2. can upgrade to ext3 in little time

    I think that's the point of strength of ext3. It could be "slower" (besides the fact that we're talking about small differences, IMHO) but it can be upgraded from old ext2 fs quickly for those who cannot afford much downtime.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: I think it's about upgrading, not fresh install (Score: 1)
    by joeg on Tuesday, March 26 @ 21:58:05 GMT
    (User Info) http://www.joeg.net

    Good point,. basically I was looking for reconfirmation of this (is what i was originally thinking)..

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, March 28 @ 21:42:13 GMT

    ReiserFS seems to be very nice. Never had a problem with it. XFS is not in the kernel yet 🙁 but works with 2.4.18 patched. JFS failed on the first test on 2.5.7.

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, March 29 @ 22:48:34 GMT

    It think for You the best choise is the XFS.

    Fist of all this is the most tested journaling fs, because it has been used by irix for several years. It was a stable base for movies animations, there are really large, and many files in this area. Irix was the first industrial multimedia unix, and xfs had done much for its success.

    Second, XFS has now really impressive max file size, partition size support, 18000 petabytes for partition size

    9000 petabybes for max file size. It'll enough for a little while.

    Third it can deal with even faulty hard disks, and because of XFS structure has the best recovery abilities. ext3 is also a safe choice. But its safety came from long existence of ext2. There is many recovery tools for ext2 and so ext3. Ext3 is good because of many tools has for it, while XFS is good because it is well made fs.

    I don't think that patching the kernel is a problem for you.

    Many users never tried XFS. If someone writes reiser, ext3 is the best, he/she should write also whitch fs-es he tried before. There is almost no anybody who tried XFS, used it for a while, and then said reiserfs is better.

    I had several problem with reiserfs. It doesn't tolerate much power faliures, and it can't do anything with faulty harddrives (bas sectors). And I also doesn't agree with Hans Reisers's opinion: 'a filesystem must be completly rewritten every 4 years'.

    Ext3 is not bad, but it's also not a real journaling fs. It's an ext2, extended with basic journaling features.

    I've not tried jfs yet.

    If you want a roboust stable filesystem, and don't want to change the partitions for a while, there is nothing better than XFS.

    There is a useful detailed acticle at linuxgazette. Is's is old but useable even nowdays. You can find it here: http://linuxgazette.org/issue55/florido.html

    [ Reply ]


    Re: Which file system to use with Debian? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Tuesday, April 02 @ 20:20:58 BST

    I believe only ext2 lets us use "chattr", a security tool.

    For example, with "chattr -i" I we can change files

    to "immutable"; that is, no one (NOT EVEN ROOT)

    can change those files without a reboot.

    Or I can make a log file appendable, but not removable.

    I weigh this great increase in security under ext2 more than I weigh

    any ease of booting through a journalling filesystem like

    Reiserfs.

    ---Jameson Burt

    [ Reply ]


    Based on: PHP-Nuke

    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2000 by Debian Planet

    You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php.