Re: Best File System for partitions over 600GB

On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:21:38AM +0530, Siju George wrote:
Hi,

Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful in any area.
Also if a better file system suits for such large partitions :-)

There are a few comparisions out there but you need to look at the
design philosophies in relation to your application. There have been
some problems with ReiserFS (no references, but there were messages on
debian-user a while ago). When I looked at this it came down to a
choice between XFS and JFS. There have also been a lot of threads on
this topic on debian-user in the past few months.

Try wikipedia and google site:ibm.com

I looked at it this way: JFS was designed by IBM for server (database)
type filesystems so all their AIX boxes run JFS. Cray uses XFS for its
compute stuff. IFRC neither journals the data (only metadata) so after
a crash, the filesystem itself will be intact and a fast reboot is
possible but there could be some data corruption. ext3 journals data as
well as metadata but takes forever to regenerate after a crash and there
can still be errors.

I went from ext3 to reiser and having errors on power failure with both
went to JFS and have had no problems since. YMMV.

Doug.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Relevant Pages

  • Re: JFS vs EXT3 vs XFS vs ReiserFS
    ... So, after 3 installs with EXT3, I decided to try something else. ... notice the installer offers JFS, XFS, and ReiserFS, so I picked JFS for ... the most stable and easy to recover file system (and I have stress ... and XFS don't have this problem, and were much faster for hosting large ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Best File System for partitions over 600GB
    ... Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above 600GB? ... I am considering XFS. ... this topic on debian-user in the past few months. ... When I was building my first MythTV box 2 years ago, I did some research and found some benchmarks, the link for which I failed to keep, that put XFS and JFS pretty much neck and neck in terms of performance, except when it came to deleting big files when JFS was significantly faster, since this is something you do a lot of with a MythTV I went for JFS and have had no problems. ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: the best
    ... you with xfs, jfs and reiserfs. ... corruption of the file system is noticed, then jfs is a good option, as it ... If you want to high speed streaming, then xfs is a good choice, specially ...
    (alt.os.linux)
  • Re: the best
    ... If you have a machine that tends to be unstable, then reiserfs is a good option so that you won't loose data. ... If you want a file system that prevents overwriting of files when corruption of the file system is noticed, then jfs is a good option, as it will by default go over to read-only if it detects something going wrong. ... If you want to high speed streaming, then xfs is a good choice, specially if you stripe two or more hard drives together. ...
    (alt.os.linux)
  • Re: Open source storage
    ... you lose power while XFS is building its extant, ... There's nothing there that even remotely hints at data corruption on ... power loss: the defined semantics of any normal Unix-style file system ...
    (comp.arch.storage)
Loading