Filesystem recommendations - Linux

This is a discussion on Filesystem recommendations - Linux ; I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of the older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do it's thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're off. Generally ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Filesystem recommendations

  1. Filesystem recommendations

    I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of the
    older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do it's
    thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're off.

    Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I thought
    I'd give ZFS a spin.

    Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.

  2. Re: Filesystem recommendations

    seani writes:

    > I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of the
    > older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do it's
    > thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're off.
    >
    > Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    > top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I thought
    > I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >
    > Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    > recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    > state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    > browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.


    Stick with ext3. It works. Is supported and people are familiar with it.

    Since these machines are only doing a bit of browsing and printing by
    your own admission then its more than adequate.

    ext3 came into being because of your needs - journaling and automatic
    clean remounting after power and SW failure. Do not mistake its
    omnipresence for mediocrity.

    --
    "If only someone would kill you two. Literally."
    -- Tattoo Vampire in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  3. Re: Filesystem recommendations

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ seani on Friday 10 October 2008 10:20 : \____

    > I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of the
    > older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do it's
    > thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're off.
    >
    > Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    > top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I thought
    > I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >
    > Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    > recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    > state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    > browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.


    ZFS Needs FUSE, so there's a performance penalty. The next Linux release ought
    to have Btrfs from Oracle and maybe ext4, but for now, since reiserfs is
    hardly maintained, ext3 seems like a good choice.

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Data lacking semantics is currency in an island
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.67 0.85 0.95 4/267 12138
    http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkjvS3QACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4xqgCgmr3tE+zsxZ dmX1ozj7P0l/Rp
    5SYAnis6kTeVlak6k8BSU4Qg749Hc+bt
    =/YF3
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  4. Re: Filesystem recommendations


    "seani" wrote in message
    news:6l8ok9Fb5kh8U1@mid.individual.net...
    > I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of the
    > older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do it's
    > thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're off.
    >
    > Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    > top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I thought
    > I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >
    > Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    > recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    > state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    > browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.


    --"recover from inadvertent power failures" Any journaling filesystem
    should be able to handle this. Get a UPS power backup. They're cheap now and
    it'll also protect your hardware from power spikes, brown-outs and all sorts
    of nasty voltage things.

    I use ext3 for most things. The drives/partitions with media files are
    formatted with XFS since it is very good at handling large files.



  5. Re: Filesystem recommendations

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > "seani" wrote in message
    > news:6l8ok9Fb5kh8U1@mid.individual.net...
    >>
    >> Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    >> top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I thought
    >> I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >>
    >> Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    >> recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    >> state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    >> browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.

    >
    > --"recover from inadvertent power failures" Any journaling filesystem
    > should be able to handle this. Get a UPS power backup. They're cheap now and
    > it'll also protect your hardware from power spikes, brown-outs and all sorts
    > of nasty voltage things.


    Indeed. Saves a lot of trouble in the long run.

    > I use ext3 for most things. The drives/partitions with media files are
    > formatted with XFS since it is very good at handling large files.


    Because of my laptop's bad battery, I've had a few abrupt shutdowns.
    Haven't had any problems with ext3. Just my own anecdote.

    --
    Give me a sleeping pill and tell me your troubles.

  6. Re: Filesystem recommendations


    "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    news:vEIHk.46366$bx1.34813@bignews1.bellsouth.net. ..
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> "seani" wrote in message
    >> news:6l8ok9Fb5kh8U1@mid.individual.net...
    >>>
    >>> Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    >>> top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I
    >>> thought
    >>> I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >>>
    >>> Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    >>> recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    >>> state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    >>> browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.

    >>
    >> --"recover from inadvertent power failures" Any journaling filesystem
    >> should be able to handle this. Get a UPS power backup. They're cheap now
    >> and
    >> it'll also protect your hardware from power spikes, brown-outs and all
    >> sorts
    >> of nasty voltage things.

    >
    > Indeed. Saves a lot of trouble in the long run.
    >
    >> I use ext3 for most things. The drives/partitions with media files are
    >> formatted with XFS since it is very good at handling large files.

    >
    > Because of my laptop's bad battery, I've had a few abrupt shutdowns.
    > Haven't had any problems with ext3. Just my own anecdote.


    I haven't had any problems with any FS either. For general use the
    performance difference between them is minor at best. Some of our customers
    for example run Oracle or some other large enterprise application in which
    case they want a FS that will give them that extra bit of performance. But
    for home/personal use most any FS will perform more-or-less equal over the
    long run. Unless you're creating/deleting lots of small files or creating
    files that are 100's of Gigs in size something like ext3 is going to work
    great.

    You mentioned your laptop battery. I have a newer laptop (about a year old)
    so the battery is still pretty healthy. My old laptop battery died a slow
    death. When it was new it worked great. Then it would only last for about an
    hour. Then the hour went down to a few minutes. Eventually it became a brick
    because it wouldn't last 2 seconds.




    > --
    > Give me a sleeping pill and tell me your troubles.




  7. Re: Filesystem recommendations

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:32:52 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


    > ZFS Needs FUSE, so there's a performance penalty. The next Linux release ought
    > to have Btrfs from Oracle and maybe ext4, but for now, since reiserfs is
    > hardly maintained, ext3 seems like a good choice.


    So much for the Linux zealot mantra of another person or the community
    taking over the project when the developer abandons it.
    Either by his own choice or not.

    The Linux community dropped Reiser like a hot potato.....

    What a bunch of phonies.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  8. Re: Filesystem recommendations

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:20:57 +0000, seani wrote:

    > I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of
    > the older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do
    > it's thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're
    > off.
    >
    > Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    > top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I
    > thought I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >
    > Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    > recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    > state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    > browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.


    Thanks for the responses.

    Hadron's point wrt ubiquity is well made; I stuck with EXT3, and a few
    scheduled rsyncs to various places.

  9. Re: Filesystem recommendations

    seani writes:

    > On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:20:57 +0000, seani wrote:
    >
    >> I'm reorganising our kit internally and I've decided to wipe a few of
    >> the older machines and reinstall. Usually I just let a chose livecd do
    >> it's thing unattended an spend 10 mins tweaking the result, and we're
    >> off.
    >>
    >> Generally this means accepting EXT3 as a default, but as reliability is
    >> top of the list as far as these particular boxes are concerned, I
    >> thought I'd give ZFS a spin.
    >>
    >> Any other suggestions? The principal aim is that the chosen FS could
    >> recover from inadvertent power failures and leave things in a consistent
    >> state. Performance isn't an issue - it would generally be a bit of
    >> browsing, some ssheet / wp work and a bit of printing.

    >
    > Thanks for the responses.
    >
    > Hadron's point wrt ubiquity is well made; I stuck with EXT3, and a few
    > scheduled rsyncs to various places.


    My pleasure.

    If you are looking at backing up and syncing SW you could do worse than
    look into using Unison too. It is excellent.

    http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/

    --
    "My college theater antics were the inspiration for Robin
    Williams' character on Mork & Mindy"
    -- Rex Ballard in comp.os.linux.advocacy

+ Reply to Thread