View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mksoft l33t
Joined: 28 May 2002 Posts: 844
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
AutoBot wrote: | I would just run ext2 instead of trying to make ext3 run faster at the cost of security. |
I think it would be wrong. I have experienced data loss (corrupt files) with ext2 on power outages
If you run ext2 you'd loose journaling options of ext3. With data=writeback ext3 journals like XFS ans Reiser. I never had problems with data loss on XFS, and wouldn't consider it less secure.
It's up to the user to decide peroformance vs level of safety, but recommending ext2 over other journal fs _________________ There's someone in my head but it's not me - Pink Floyd |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AutoBot l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 Posts: 968 Location: Usually Out
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
First of by security I meant safety, second I have lost data using ext2, ext3, and XFS so your never really safe. I have yet to experience any data corruption with ReiserFS but I haven't used it for very long either. _________________ This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
masseya Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 2602 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think klieber was dead on when he said this. klieber wrote: | Ask six different linux users what file types you should use and you'll get six different answers. A lot of it is very subjective and dependent on your particular needs. (i.e. speed vs. stability vs. simplicity)
Try them all out -- see which one floats your boat the best.
--kurt |
I haven't lost any data with ext3 and I've been using it for quite a long time. I also don't really notice any speed difference between that and reiser and xfs, although I haven't used xfs all that much. The people to ask are sys admins who have to handle a bunch of file servers 'n' stuff. I am not one of those, so take my file system recommendation with a grain of salt. Really, take anyone's with a grain of salt. You should probably just try out the ones you are considering and decide on your own. _________________ if i never try anything, i never learn anything..
if i never take a risk, i stay where i am.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AutoBot l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 Posts: 968 Location: Usually Out
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I try not to really *recommend* a filesystem, I just state things that have happened to me on any given filesystem.
I also agree with klieber, filesystem posts are like a religious debate sometimes _________________ This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
radfaraf n00b
Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 55 Location: NJ
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone have any docs or know anything about changing the ext3 journal size to get better performance with different types of data. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
klieber Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 3657 Location: San Francisco, CA
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
radfaraf wrote: | Anyone have any docs or know anything about changing the ext3 journal size to get better performance with different types of data. |
Well, Google certainly seems to be a good place to start.
--kurt _________________ The problem with political jokes is that they get elected |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jtmace Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 20 Jun 2002 Posts: 101
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 4:08 pm Post subject: EXT2 |
|
|
I use ext2.. Sure its not journaled but its rock solid.. I also had serious problems with XFS and the Premptive Kernel patches. If not for that I would use XFS.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AutoBot l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 Posts: 968 Location: Usually Out
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:57 pm Post subject: Re: EXT2 |
|
|
jtmace wrote: | I use ext2.. Sure its not journaled but its rock solid.. I also had serious problems with XFS and the Premptive Kernel patches. If not for that I would use XFS.. |
Same problem here, which is why I use ReiserFS. _________________ This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DArtagnan l33t
Joined: 30 Apr 2002 Posts: 942 Location: Israel, Jerusalem
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:20 pm Post subject: w3m text browser ;-) |
|
|
Hei
I use 'w3m' text browser and is cool, better that lynx ?!
How the hel I can go to other URL?
In lynx i was pressed 'g' and enter new url
How it goes here? _________________ All for one and one for All
--
MACPRO machine... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
klieber Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 3657 Location: San Francisco, CA
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 7:47 pm Post subject: Re: w3m text browser ;-) |
|
|
pacman wrote: | Hei
I use 'w3m' text browser and is cool, better that lynx ?!
How the hel I can go to other URL?
In lynx i was pressed 'g' and enter new url
How it goes here? |
Um...pacman? I think you're in the wrong thread. The w3m thread is down the hall...
--kurt _________________ The problem with political jokes is that they get elected |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AutoBot l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 Posts: 968 Location: Usually Out
|
Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2002 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He gets lost sometimes , or maybe he got an email like I did without actually subscribing to a thread. _________________ This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ste n00b
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 Posts: 4 Location: France/Compiegne
|
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2002 11:01 pm Post subject: Gentoo documentation advice about ReiserFS |
|
|
I'm using XFS but I had tried reiserfs before I had started with gentoo. I haven't experienced any problem with thoses one. I think that the next time I have to chose a filesystem, I will go again for ReiserFS. It seems to help a lot for "updatedb" and "find", but thats the only difference I can notice in a normal usage. maybe Reiserfs can help a little in compilations because packages sources often use small .c and .h files (but CPU and buffer memory is probably more important).
The gentoo install guid is IMHO a little to aggressive with ReiserFS. There are storys about data corruption on every filesystem, and I'm not sure ReiserFS is worst than the others. <troll> Did the author of the gentoo install docs personnaly experienced problem with ReiserFS ? </troll>
Maybe the install documentation could be updated to be a little more objective. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mksoft l33t
Joined: 28 May 2002 Posts: 844
|
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2002 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Linux users (and specially Gentoo ones), shouldn't be afraid from experiments.
Users can set aside a partition for testing (not the production one), and have it beaten to death
File systems are evolving all the time, and people having crashes with a fs (not matter which one) long time ago, will surely find the situation different today, and I'm one's favoriate fs is another's nightmare.
Feel free to experiment (this is the fun part with open source) _________________ There's someone in my head but it's not me - Pink Floyd |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AutoBot l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 Posts: 968 Location: Usually Out
|
Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2002 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When the install docs were written ReiserFS was younger than it is now, for some reason I believe it still says the same thing but you can fully ignore not using ReiserFS because of corruption IMO.
Daniel Robbins knows what he is talking about when it comes to filesystems, and if he says ReiserFS is a bad choice *now* I would listen but I don't think he would say it anymore. _________________ This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fghellar Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 Posts: 856 Location: Porto Alegre, BR
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|