LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-08-2005, 09:53 AM   #1
cjnodell
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Remchingen, Deutschland
Distribution: Undecided
Posts: 50

Rep: Reputation: 15
Question Choosing a File System


Hey. I am new to Linux, and I am trying to decide on a file system.

I know a little about the various options, but would appreciate haring from some people who have been using Linux for a little while.

Most of the files I work with are anywhere from 0 to 100 mb in size, with more files being under the 50 mb mark than over.

I work a bit with raw Digital Video and like to keep entire tapes whole, which means files of up to 20 gb (normally one or two such files exist on my computer at a time).

I mostly browse the web, play games, edit videos (with a lot of encoding and decoding ) and use the office production suites (such as open offic).

I would tend to put speed as a slightly more important factor than stability, but just barely. So I would like to find a good mix of speed and stability.

So, here are my questions:

I can see the benefit of using a Journaling File System, but is there any benefit to using a Non-Journaling File System (ext2 to be specific)?

What is the max file size for ext2 and ext3 (I have read numbers ranging from 2 gb to 2,000 gb)?

How can I tell which version of Reiserfs I am using (I would prefer 3.6 to 3.5)?

Which of all the file systems (journaling and non-journaling) would you recommend for me based on my intended usage and why?

I would appreciate any suggestions.

Charles

Last edited by cjnodell; 06-08-2005 at 10:27 AM.
 
Old 06-08-2005, 11:02 AM   #2
Crashed_Again
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Atlantic City, NJ
Distribution: Ubuntu & Arch
Posts: 3,503

Rep: Reputation: 57
What distribution are you using or planning on using? Personally, I use reiserfs on all my machines. Its faster then ext3 and I've never had any stability issues with it(knock on wood).
 
Old 06-08-2005, 11:28 AM   #3
cjnodell
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Remchingen, Deutschland
Distribution: Undecided
Posts: 50

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
I am trying to decide between k/ubuntu and fedora... It is a tough decision... Which version of reiserfs do you use?
 
Old 06-08-2005, 11:35 AM   #4
Crashed_Again
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Atlantic City, NJ
Distribution: Ubuntu & Arch
Posts: 3,503

Rep: Reputation: 57
Quote:
Originally posted by cjnodell
I am trying to decide between k/ubuntu and fedora... It is a tough decision... Which version of reiserfs do you use?
Its 3. something. I don't remember off the top of my head and I'm not on my linux machine right now. I've heard great things about Reiserfs 4 but its still being tested as far as I know.
 
Old 06-08-2005, 04:04 PM   #5
ctkroeker
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Paraguay
Posts: 1,565
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 50
Re: Choosing a File System

Quote:
Originally posted by cjnodell

Which of all the file systems (journaling and non-journaling) would you recommend for me based on my intended usage and why?
Charles
I recommend ReiserFS, as it has not given me problems when I was using it (I'm temporarily using winXP )
So Thats a good option.
 
Old 06-08-2005, 07:36 PM   #6
securehack
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: United States
Distribution: Slackware 10.1, Debian 3.0, WinXProSP1, Fedora Core 3
Posts: 425

Rep: Reputation: 30
Go with fedora =D and I would also suggest to you ReiserFS.

Although, I can't agree with the majority who say that ReiserFS is "more stable" than ext3.

Quote:
Personally, I use reiserfs on all my machines. Its faster then ext3 and I've never had any stability issues with it(knock on wood).
Quote:
I recommend ReiserFS, as it has not given me problems when I was using it
Can you guys back that up? Just curious.....

--Abid Kazmi
 
Old 06-08-2005, 09:56 PM   #7
bigrigdriver
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: East Centra Illinois, USA
Distribution: Debian Jessie 8.4
Posts: 5,873

Rep: Reputation: 348Reputation: 348Reputation: 348Reputation: 348
Personally, I use ext3. Where I live (out of town, rural, in the country), power outages are a regular occurance. Ext3 recovers the journal on re-boot, and I'm good to go (a 6 year old computer with a 450 MHz cpu). If the need should ever arise that I need to revert to ext2, all the documentation I've read says it's more easily done from ext3 and any of the other journaled file systems.

As far as file size limits are concerned, I don't know what the limits are. My entire distro is, at present, just 7.8 gig. I don't have any problems with it.
 
Old 06-08-2005, 10:15 PM   #8
btmiller
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: In the DC 'burbs
Distribution: Arch, Scientific Linux, Debian, Ubuntu
Posts: 4,275

Rep: Reputation: 370Reputation: 370Reputation: 370Reputation: 370
Recent versions of ext3 have large file support. On the big file servers at work I routinely manipulate files that are over 100 GB in size and ext3 handles it well. A non journaling filesystem is slightly faster because there's no journal to maintain, but you'll regret using it the first time you have a power failure.
 
Old 06-09-2005, 01:49 PM   #9
securehack
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: United States
Distribution: Slackware 10.1, Debian 3.0, WinXProSP1, Fedora Core 3
Posts: 425

Rep: Reputation: 30
And no one has still responded to "Can you guys back that up? Just curious....." about how RefFS is more stable than ext3.

And btmiller has made a really good point, and as Taken from:
https://lists.clusterfs.com/pipermai...ry/000563.html
Quote:
We're not aware of any limits below 2 TB with ext3 and 2.4. Almost all of
our customers use 2 TB backend file systems.
 
Old 06-09-2005, 02:06 PM   #10
cjnodell
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Remchingen, Deutschland
Distribution: Undecided
Posts: 50

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
OK. How can i find out which version of ext3 or reiser a given distro uses? Where is a good place to look up the max file size of the various ext3 versions?
 
Old 06-09-2005, 07:32 PM   #11
J.W.
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Boise, ID
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 6,642

Rep: Reputation: 83
Here's an article about filesystem comparisons that should be of interest. My recommendation would be to use either ext3 or reiserfs, or whatever the default filesystem type is on your distro. As for me personally, I use reiserfs on all my boxes. It's the default for Slackware, and I figure that if Patrick makes it the default, then I should too. -- J.W.
 
Old 06-10-2005, 02:16 AM   #12
michaelsanford
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Ottawa/Montréal
Distribution: Slackware + Darwin (MacOS X)
Posts: 468

Rep: Reputation: 30
You have two options: if you want a journaling filesystem go with ReiserFS, it's faster than ext3 for the most part.

However, if you're more interested in speed and don't care about journaling, go with ext2 because it is faster since it doesn't have to write the journal at every transaction.

FYI journaling is just a faster way to deal with a system crash after reboot, it doesn't provide, AFAIK, that much more stability.

On my Internet gateway system (at work) we have an array (non RAID) of SATA disk drives. The drive that holds the system and mysql databases and web pages and other mission-critical stuff like the proxy server and other binaries and sources is on a ReiserFS drive. The web proxy cache (the actual cached files) is on a dedicated ext2 disk -- it's slightly faster because it doesn't journal and if a few files in the cache get a little corrupted after a dirty shutdown, nobody really cares.
 
Old 06-10-2005, 07:24 AM   #13
securehack
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: United States
Distribution: Slackware 10.1, Debian 3.0, WinXProSP1, Fedora Core 3
Posts: 425

Rep: Reputation: 30
nobody really cares. until something huge happens and you switch to ResFS =P

--Abid Kazmi
 
Old 06-10-2005, 09:51 AM   #14
michaelsanford
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Ottawa/Montréal
Distribution: Slackware + Darwin (MacOS X)
Posts: 468

Rep: Reputation: 30
=P well it's just the cache right, so if we lose a couple of files it's no big deal. But if I were to choose a journaling FS for that, it would be ReiserFS.
 
Old 06-10-2005, 10:27 AM   #15
securehack
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: United States
Distribution: Slackware 10.1, Debian 3.0, WinXProSP1, Fedora Core 3
Posts: 425

Rep: Reputation: 30
Ahh... there we go, the admitation. Not sure if that is a word but you get the point =P .
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
An error Occurred during the file system check. Dropping you to shell; the system wil aneikei Linux - Newbie 3 02-11-2010 08:38 PM
How to read .chm file in fedora, can't mount ntfs file system ishti_du Linux - Newbie 12 03-06-2007 04:27 AM
figuring out 'file system' and 'swap file system' types TrulyTessa Linux - Newbie 3 09-26-2005 07:46 PM
System complains failing automounting file system aladin Linux - Hardware 1 08-30-2005 11:07 AM
Choosing H/W for a new Linux system nbcohen Linux - General 3 09-08-2003 02:51 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration