Nehal Mistry
04-11-2001, 05:33 PM
one of these will probably be as successful as ext2, which one do you think it will be? what are advantages/disadvantages of these? :confused:
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : reiserfs or ext3? which will YOU use!
Craig McPherson
04-12-2001, 01:44 AM
I've been using ReiserFS for over a year now, and have never had a single problem. It's fast, and it's awesome.
Ext3, is... well, it sucks. It's just Ext2 with journaling code added. That's all. That's the only difference.
The plus to this is that it makes Ext2 and Ext3 filesystems completely compatible. There's no difference between the filesystems themselves, but when an Ext2/3 filesystem is MOUNTED as ext3, journaling will be done on it, and when it's mounted as ext2, no journaling will be done. The downside of this is that it's not, in any other way, an improvement over Ext2, and hence it's freakishly slow.
The only downsides to ReiserFS are the incompatibility with Ext2 (meaning a decent bit of work involved in getting moved over to it), and a lack of some Ext2/3 features (file attributes, advanced mount options, etc). Technically, though, it's brilliantly and revolutionarily designed, and blazing fast, and otherwise all-around good.
Ext3, is... well, it sucks. It's just Ext2 with journaling code added. That's all. That's the only difference.
The plus to this is that it makes Ext2 and Ext3 filesystems completely compatible. There's no difference between the filesystems themselves, but when an Ext2/3 filesystem is MOUNTED as ext3, journaling will be done on it, and when it's mounted as ext2, no journaling will be done. The downside of this is that it's not, in any other way, an improvement over Ext2, and hence it's freakishly slow.
The only downsides to ReiserFS are the incompatibility with Ext2 (meaning a decent bit of work involved in getting moved over to it), and a lack of some Ext2/3 features (file attributes, advanced mount options, etc). Technically, though, it's brilliantly and revolutionarily designed, and blazing fast, and otherwise all-around good.
PLBlaze
04-12-2001, 10:48 AM
I'll back what Craig wrote...reiserfs is the way to go for now on either 2.2.x or 2.4.x series of kernel.Very fast,fscks take only seconds.Ext3 is nothing new except for the journal...and if i'm correct it's only for 2.2.x kernels,most likely fscks are faster due to journaling on ext3.
The next wave of journaling filesystems to watch for is XFS and JFS from SGI and IBM.
I've played with both of them for a while...
While JFS has long way to go,i would not recommend it as / fs (had many nasty bugs),XFS is getting there nicely (production release should be coming sometime this summer) but it's only meant for 2.4.x kernels.
That said there will be a choice to make when selecting the filesystem to use on Linux...There is a nice comparison page detailing all of these filesystems found on LG (http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue55/florido.html) worth reading.
The next wave of journaling filesystems to watch for is XFS and JFS from SGI and IBM.
I've played with both of them for a while...
While JFS has long way to go,i would not recommend it as / fs (had many nasty bugs),XFS is getting there nicely (production release should be coming sometime this summer) but it's only meant for 2.4.x kernels.
That said there will be a choice to make when selecting the filesystem to use on Linux...There is a nice comparison page detailing all of these filesystems found on LG (http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue55/florido.html) worth reading.
Craig McPherson
04-13-2001, 04:17 AM
Last I checked, all of the 2.4 kernel have Ext3 support as an option. The test series did, at least, I haven't played with it since then so I haven't checked.
The reason Ext3 is so slow is that it journals disk writes completely in advance, rather than just journaling metadata. This means disk writes literally, literally, take twice as long as with Ext2, and that's not very good.
The reason Ext3 is so slow is that it journals disk writes completely in advance, rather than just journaling metadata. This means disk writes literally, literally, take twice as long as with Ext2, and that's not very good.
Blackknight
04-13-2001, 11:07 AM
xfs is very good. You know, you can always use a combination of file systems. I have / on reiser, and /home on xfs exported with nfs. Haven't had any problems with it.
blah
04-13-2001, 11:18 AM
Does reiserfs have support for 2G+ files? I can't stand being limited to only 2G.
Nehal Mistry
04-13-2001, 02:46 PM
blacknight: is xfs faster than reiser?
Blackknight
04-13-2001, 05:23 PM
From what I've noticed, xfs is a lot faster. It's just a little bit harder to install, since the instructions on the web page are messed up.
XxMaCaBrExX
04-13-2001, 05:55 PM
You mean there's other partition types besides reiserfs? :D
Nalle
04-15-2001, 09:48 AM
I've tested out ext3 and ReiserFS. I've found that Reiser is better than ext3 (faster and more streamlined, I think).
There's talk about including Reiser in the kernel (no not patches - they exist allready).
I, however am using Slack at present time, so I use ext2 - Slackusers don't move to fast, since stability is of great importance for us. More so than speed in the most instances.
There's talk about including Reiser in the kernel (no not patches - they exist allready).
I, however am using Slack at present time, so I use ext2 - Slackusers don't move to fast, since stability is of great importance for us. More so than speed in the most instances.
Nalle
04-15-2001, 09:48 AM
I've tested out ext3 and ReiserFS. I've found that Reiser is better than ext3 (faster and more streamlined, I think).
There's talk about including Reiser in the kernel (no not patches - they exist allready).
I, however am using Slack at present time, so I use ext2 - Slackusers don't move to fast, since stability is of great importance for us. More so than speed in the most instances.
There's talk about including Reiser in the kernel (no not patches - they exist allready).
I, however am using Slack at present time, so I use ext2 - Slackusers don't move to fast, since stability is of great importance for us. More so than speed in the most instances.
Nalle
04-15-2001, 09:49 AM
[ 15 April 2001: Message edited by: Nalle ]
Strike
04-15-2001, 01:03 PM
I was thinking XFS myself. The cool thing is that it also supports LVM stuff (I'm pretty sure ReiserFS does too). So, what I'm going to do is make a huge backup of everything I've got and then rebuild my system ... one of these days, when having a computer that is ready to go isn't so important.
DrDebian
05-01-2001, 04:27 AM
Originally posted by Nehal Mistry:
<STRONG>one of these will probably be as successful as ext2, which one do you think it will be? what are advantages/disadvantages of these? :confused:</STRONG>
I don't know which will be the default of preference for future Linux distributions, but all I know is that ReiserFS is ready for primetime now and it's really a formidable FS with many benefits when compared to Ext2.
This might change once XFS and JFS are released and stable.
For now, I can only recommend ReiserFS to any Linux user who knows how to change /etc/fstab and create a new filesystem.
<STRONG>one of these will probably be as successful as ext2, which one do you think it will be? what are advantages/disadvantages of these? :confused:</STRONG>
I don't know which will be the default of preference for future Linux distributions, but all I know is that ReiserFS is ready for primetime now and it's really a formidable FS with many benefits when compared to Ext2.
This might change once XFS and JFS are released and stable.
For now, I can only recommend ReiserFS to any Linux user who knows how to change /etc/fstab and create a new filesystem.
DrDebian
05-01-2001, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by DrDebian:
<STRONG>all I know is that ReiserFS is ready for primetime now and it's really a formidable FS with many benefits when compared to Ext2.
This might change once XFS and JFS are released and stable.
</STRONG>
Seems like I spoke too soon: According to this press release ( http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010501/sftu043.html ), SGI has just release version 1.0 of XFS.
<STRONG>all I know is that ReiserFS is ready for primetime now and it's really a formidable FS with many benefits when compared to Ext2.
This might change once XFS and JFS are released and stable.
</STRONG>
Seems like I spoke too soon: According to this press release ( http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010501/sftu043.html ), SGI has just release version 1.0 of XFS.
DrDebian
05-01-2001, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by DrDebian:
<STRONG>Seems like I spoke too soon: According to this press release ( http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010501/sftu043.html ), SGI has just released version 1.0 of XFS.</STRONG>
<STRONG>Seems like I spoke too soon: According to this press release ( http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010501/sftu043.html ), SGI has just released version 1.0 of XFS.</STRONG>
DrDebian
05-01-2001, 12:51 PM
Seems like I spoke too soon: According to this press release ( http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010501/sftu043.html ), SGI has just released version 1.0 of XFS.
PLBlaze
05-01-2001, 07:36 PM
Yeah, i've seen the announcement on the mailing list...time to compile new 2.4.4 with XFS and put it on /...
BTW, not to leave JFS behind they (IBM) released today 3rd beta snapshot of their journaling fs.
w00t :D
BTW, not to leave JFS behind they (IBM) released today 3rd beta snapshot of their journaling fs.
w00t :D
justlinux.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.