VectorLinux
September 23, 2014, 04:09:14 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Visit our home page for VL info. To search the old message board go to http://vectorlinux.com/forum1. The first VL forum is temporarily offline until we can find a host for it. Thanks for your patience.
 
Now powered by KnowledgeDex.
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Please support VectorLinux!
Poll
Question: Which File System do you usually install with VL ?
ext3 - 10 (37%)
JFS - 2 (7.4%)
ReiserFS - 10 (37%)
XFS - 5 (18.5%)
other - 0 (0%)
Total Voters: 27

Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: File System Poll  (Read 3527 times)
flip city
Packager
Vectorite
****
Posts: 340


Way Out In HyperSpace


« on: June 15, 2009, 07:13:48 pm »

You may also wish to explain why or whatever suits your fancy.
Logged

Witek Mozga
Vectorite
***
Posts: 113



WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2009, 01:14:41 am »

You may also wish to explain why or whatever suits your fancy.

I polled it a year ago:
http://forum.vectorlinux.com/index.php?topic=6586.0
Logged

MikeCindi
Tester
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1073


« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2009, 09:15:25 am »

My post a year ago I was using reiserfs now I use XFS.
Logged

The plans of the diligent lead to profit...Pro. 21:5
VL64 7.1b3                                     RLU 486143
M0E-lnx
Administrator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 3180



« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2009, 09:34:02 am »

I did a reverse of what mikecindi did...
I was on xfs a year ago, I'm in reiserfs now.
Mostly because of the lack of tools for xfs.. no way to resize
Logged

newt
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1132



« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2009, 09:52:25 am »

I did a reverse of what mikecindi did...
I was on xfs a year ago, I'm in reiserfs now.
Mostly because of the lack of tools for xfs.. no way to resize
Same here. Not that I've ever needed to resize my partitions, but _IF_ I did I would want the option.
Logged
MikeCindi
Tester
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1073


« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2009, 05:51:38 pm »

Initially resizing was a significant reason I chose reiserfs but also because in some early comparisons (on 2.4 kernels) it out performed xfs, jfs, and ext3 in most areas. The same person who did those early comparisons then later did similar ones on a 2.6 kernel and xfs was slightly better then jfs and easily better the reiserfs in its performance. I also noted over the past year or so that I never needed to resize my partitions so reiserfs became less favorable to me. Now if I suspect that I will need to resize a partition then reiserfs is my choice (and actually you can enlarge xfs just not shrink it at least not easily/practically). As for ext2/3 they have proven stability but way too much overhead. (Actually ext2 performs well but not being journaled has a significant downside.)
FWIW,
Mike
« Last Edit: June 16, 2009, 05:53:13 pm by MikeCindi » Logged

The plans of the diligent lead to profit...Pro. 21:5
VL64 7.1b3                                     RLU 486143
Joe1962
Administrator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 2499



WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2009, 05:29:59 am »

I was always reiserfs user (though I flirted with ext3 for a short while), then moved to xfs when 6.0 came out, but for some reason it seemed quite slower, so am now back to reiserfs.
Logged

O'Neill (RE the Asgard): "Usually they ask nicely before they ignore us and do what they damn well please."
http://joe1962.bigbox.info
Running: VL 7 Std 64 + self-cooked XFCE-4.10
Witek Mozga
Vectorite
***
Posts: 113



WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2009, 05:58:04 am »

I have used reiserfs, XFS and JFS (parallely on several machines). I did not notice any substantial differences between their efficiency in everyday desktop use.
Logged

StrayBit
Vectorite
***
Posts: 373



« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2009, 06:06:14 am »

Generally I use reiserfs.  I've tried ext3 and xfs each once.  I've forgotten why the attempts lasted such a short time.
Logged

Dell GX280: [7.0-Gold-Final], 6.0-Gold-Final, 5.9-Gold
HP 670 Win7 & VL7.0
lagagnon
Global Moderator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1922



WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2009, 11:25:03 am »

I have installed VL on numerous computers (probably over 400 by now) for a charity - always using ReiserFS. Never had a filesystem problem any any one of them over a period of 4 years or so....
Logged

"As people become more intelligent they care less for preachers and more for teachers". Robert G. Ingersoll
Windozer
Vectorite
***
Posts: 386


Have Vector Linux, Will Travel.


« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2009, 12:06:44 pm »

Flip,

I'm in the reiser crowd.

started with ext3, went to reiser, then noodled with XFS - and as Joe said, I too found it slower in some tests.  On the recommendations of some of our dear forum members, I went back to reiser. And I've not had a problem since - knock on wood - or rather knock on spinning, metallic-sputtered aluminum substrates Smiley)

Although this is a tad off your poll, I wonder what ext4 is really like - anyone used it ?

- Howard
Logged

483,617th Registered Linux Snoozer
sparkyhall
Vectorite
***
Posts: 118


« Reply #11 on: June 17, 2009, 01:04:46 pm »

Ext3 for me for no reason other than I wanted a reliable file system and the comparison tests I saw showed very little difference between any of them.

Chris
Logged
GrannyGeek
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2567


« Reply #12 on: June 17, 2009, 06:01:28 pm »

I always used reiserfs, but my last two installs I switched to ext3. I had to install a fresh VL6 Deluxe when Flash stopped working in Opera on my original VL6 Deluxe partition. I tried *everything* to fix this, but finally threw in the towel and installed another VL6 Deluxe on a different partition using ext3. Flash is working with Opera on this partition.

I have no evidence that reiserfs had anything to do with this problem, but I figured what the heck? I tried everything else. Maybe it was a file system glitch. When my Turion laptop died and I set up my old Toshiba laptop with VL6 Light, I used ext3 on it. I haven't noticed any performance differences.
--GrannyGeek
Logged

Registered Linux User #397786

Happily running VL 7 Gold on  a Sempron LE-1300 desktop (2.3 GHz), 4 G RAM,  GeForce 6150 SE onboard graphics and on an HP Pavilion dv7 i7, 6 gigs, Intel 2nd Generation Integrated Graphics Controller
Witek Mozga
Vectorite
***
Posts: 113



WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 18, 2009, 04:28:36 am »

Although this is a tad off your poll, I wonder what ext4 is really like - anyone used it ?

I am using it for data partition. It seems to work OK. I also installed slackware current-ISO using ext4. Everything is fine.
Logged

MikeCindi
Tester
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1073


« Reply #14 on: June 18, 2009, 06:05:51 am »

The very little experience I have with ext4 reminded me why I don't use the journaled ext# filesystems. Their overhead is unaccepatable.
As for performance of any FS for the average user there will probably not be significant differences noticed. Surfing the web, typing letters/email, looking at graphics, etc. are not disk-intensive tasks. It's when one is moving a lot of data from one place to another that your FS performance or lack thereof shows up.
Logged

The plans of the diligent lead to profit...Pro. 21:5
VL64 7.1b3                                     RLU 486143
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!