FileSystem Choices

zoom · n00b Joined: 26 Jan 2004 Posts: 46

I'm in the process of setting up a new Linux server for my office and I'm wondering what filesystem would be the best for stability and performance (error on the side of stability). I'm thinking of setting up the following filesystems/partitions for the server.

/boot ext2
/ (root) ext3

The remaining partitions would be part of an LVM group with each using reiserfs.

/usr, /home, /var, /tmp, /opt

I've searched the forums and found both good and neg feedback about using reiser, however those posts were quite old. I know that reiser4 is coming soon as well. Do you think that reiser is a good choice at this point in time??

I should note that the server will be used to host DNS, Mail, Webs and MySql. The bulk of the files will be small but numerous hence my choice of reiser.

Purrkur · Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 8:03 am Post subject:

It has become quite popular to rag on Reiserfs because it had such a bad track record in the early stages of 2.4. However, ext3 isn't without its faults and bugs either. I have also done some reading into the cases where people have given Reiserfs a bad grade because of an "incident" and my personal opinion of those is that the individuals having these issues have many times been very unknowledgeable about Reiserfs, how it works and how to sort out issues when they arise.

I have personally had a Reiserfs partition go seriously bad on me once. The reason for it going bad was that I was messing about so the problem was self-induced

However, I kept my cool, read the documentation (which was pretty good IMO) and I was able to recover all of the data from the partition in the end.

SUSE uses Reiserfs as their default filesystem if I am not mistaken which would mean that they rate it as being production ready. I would certainly think so as well. I also think that you are correct in your judgement of using Reiser based on what you will be using the server for.

Just my .02c worth....
_________________
Punk is an attitude
not a fashion style

theBlackDragon · l33t Joined: 23 Nov 2002 Posts: 768 Location: Belgium

I have to agree with Purrkur, I never had any problems with ReiserFS, but I had ext3 go bad on me numerous times, without me messing with it, just after a crash (due to power failure) my ext3 kept saying it was royally screwed beyond the point of fixability, my system still ran flawlessly but it's not a nice error to get from fsck every boot... I've never had this sort of thing happen with a ReiserFS partition.
_________________
Fvwm|Fvwm forum

zoom · n00b Joined: 26 Jan 2004 Posts: 46

Purrkur makes a good point about SuSE using reiser as it's default file system. If it's good for SuSE Standard/Enterprise Server then it's probably just fine for production.

Thanks for the feedback, Reiserfs it is!!

playfool · Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 3:33 pm Post subject:

Just for kicks I tried installing my Gentoo system on JFS this time, and it's quite nice so far except when I get an incorrect halt, /home will not be fsck'ed and thus not mounted on boot up, I have never seen that problem with any other filesystems.

I'm still holding out for Reiser4 to be marked stable, I tried the last snapshot and it's truly amazing.

teedog · Apprentice Joined: 09 Mar 2004 Posts: 211

http://fsbench.netnation.com/

I chose JFS for an old computer running as a file server since JFS uses the least CPU resources and the server handles a small number of large files. I am using XFS on my laptop. ReiserFS is known to work well with lots of small files, which isn't exactly the situation ordinary desktop/laptop users are in, IMHO. Reiser4 uses an insane amount of CPU resources and is still not completely stable. I'd stick with JFS and XFS. I suppose ext3 is still a fair choice.

HydroSan · Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 4:11 pm Post subject:

IIRC, ReiserFS was developed by Mp3.com for their servers on the 2.4.x kernel line. There after, SuSE took over development. Thats why they use it by default.

Personally, I've used ReiserFS on all /(root) partitions without a single problem with it. My setup is currently:

/boot - ext2
/ - ReiserFS
/usr/portage - Reiser4
/tmp - ext3
_________________
I was a Gangster for Capitalism, by Major General Smedley Butler.

Server status: Currently down, being replaced with fresh install - 20% completed.

dmouritsendk · Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 4:35 pm Post subject:

I think this benchmark is kinda neat, he does a complete mongo benchmark and also tries to simulate/test some real life scenarios.

I've always been a big fan of SGIs, since they where the first introduction to the world of Unix for me, so I'm a bit biased thorwards XFS because of my wonderfull experinces with SGI(which to me stands out as one of the most rocksolid platforms I've ever had the pleasure of working with.).

Though, I currently use reiserfs for my primary workstation (and xfs for my general purpose headless box)), because i wanted to try it. And its been great, I haven't had ONE single problem with Reiser3, as for speed. It seems snappy enough, I haven't had XFS on the disk yet so i cant really compare the two. Though, I dont think the difference will be noticable anyways. Both seems like high quality filesystems.

PS: XFS are also being used in production servers all over, for examples check this. Its a pretty impressive list.

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

/boot = ext2
/ = ext3
/home = ext3

I plan on trying Reiser4 once it hits a high enough version (probably 1.0). However, I'm always too busy downloading Anime. Good thing I have a DVD burner. lol

ShadyCharacter · n00b Joined: 14 Apr 2004 Posts: 33

mine is
/boot - ext2
/ - ext3
/home - reiserfs

sapphirecat · Guru Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 376

The Filesystem choice thread
_________________
Former Gentoo user; switched to Kubuntu 7.04 when I got sick of waiting on gcc. Chance of thread necro if you reply now approaching 100%...