Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

ext2

ext3

ext4

reiserfs

reiser4

jfs

xfs

other

[Witek Mozga]

There are many filesystem available for linux
(benchmarks here: http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszcz)

I`ve been using mainly reiserfs for 5 years but as its creator to be held in prison for many years which makes impeding of its progress very possible, I consider some alternatives.

I kept my data on ext3 but deleting large files took much times. I changed it to XFS few days ago.

I installed slackware recently on a machine and I chose JFS (encouraged by the above benchmarks) for root partition.

[M0E-lnx]

XFS. I've noticed it's faster that others

[Witek Mozga]

XFS. I've noticed it's faster that others

why then you did not vote for it 
the result for xfs is zero

[M0E-lnx]

XFS. I've noticed it's faster that others

why then you did not vote for it 
the result for xfs is zero

Made the first post from my cell phone. Poll does not show up there... but I am voting for it now

[MikeCindi]

I user reiserfs for root as most of the files there are small in size (most less then 2Mb). My home partition I use XFS which has multimedia files which tend to be large (>10Mb).

[alec]

I miseread the question as what FS would you use
So I voted for ext4. Read only good things about it, now it is supported in latest kernels, only need the tools to work with it.

[toothandnail]

XFS. I've been  using it for the last 2 years. Its fast, and, in my experience, completely reliable.

paul.

[exeterdad]

reiserfs for several years.  I want to try out JFS.  Just haven't investigated what's involved yet.

[Witek Mozga]

reiserfs for several years.  I want to try out JFS.  Just haven't investigated what's involved yet.

I found these interesting comments on wikipedia:
http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Debian/2008-01/msg01808.html

[Joe1962]

I've been using reiserfs for years now, except for a few months with ext3, but that turned out to be surprisingly slower. Lately however, I've been moving to xfs on physical installs, but keeping reiserfs on virtual machines. Anyway, since I'm only allowed one vote, It was xfs, which should be my choice for now on, at least for a while.

[Witek Mozga]

I've been using reiserfs for years now, except for a few months with ext3, but that turned out to be surprisingly slower. Lately however, I've been moving to xfs on physical installs, but keeping reiserfs on virtual machines. Anyway, since I'm only allowed one vote, It was xfs, which should be my choice for now on, at least for a while.

I`ve just read that GRUB sometimes has problems with XFS/JFS partition to boot.
LILO should be used instead, for example: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=415623

[Joe1962]

Well... I'm a lilo fan...

[MikeCindi]

I`ve just read that GRUB sometimes has problems with XFS/JFS partition to boot.
LILO should be used instead, for example: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=415623

Another problem, and why I don't use XFS for root, is that you shouldn't load a bootloader in the boot-sector of an XFS partition (need to use MBR of the disk). While I was able to do the "bad thing" of putting lilo in the XFS partition boot-sector without adverse effects it would seem that my partition was at great risk because of it.

[Joe1962]

Indeed. That's pretty much the only issue with xfs that I found when chaining lilos with multiple distros installed. If you need to do this, then the secondary distros would need a different root filesystem. I'm down to a single VL install though (not much free time to experiment lately), so it's become a non-issue for me ATM.

[Xeon]

I was one of the people that asked XFS support for VL, and I am glad it was implemented. Since 2 years its XFS all the way here. Fast, and very decent (no corruption so far)