Linux - NewbieThis 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!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Just wondering which one would be better for me to use. What exactly is the maximum file size for each one? I've heard that there can be issues with ReiserFS V3 when an unexpected power failure (which does happen here from time-to-time) occurs. Also, how good is Windows (XP) support for these partitions? Can Windows read from either/both? write to either/both?
Windows cannot read from either natively, however third-party software allows it to. I cannot comment on the quality of this software.
As for the filesystems themselves, ReiserFS is generally better if you have lots of small files (like a mail server.) I have had to do a hard reboot while the hard drive was going crazy. It messed up the FS, but was nothing a little fsck couldn't fix . If you want something super fast and reliable, you could try out reiser4, but it's not very stable yet. You will also need to build and patch a kernel to enable it.
Hope this helps.
So on ReiserFS v3 it's unlikely that any irreversable damage would be done in the event of a sudden power loss?
Very unlikely, I've turned of my computer more than once without unmounting and I've never had a problem. reirserfsck will check it at boot when it's been uncleanly umnount but it's very fast. I usto use ext3, it is much more likely to get messed up on power loss.
There are benchmarks on the web that compare ext2, ext3, reiserfs, xfs, and jfs. 100 tests or so and reiserfs only lost to ext3 in three or four. In my opinion reiserfs is the best all around fs for linux, without a doubt.
Originally posted by chris318 I still prefer ext3 for reasons other than performance tho... Mostly backward compatibility
huh, backwards compatibilty with what? it's a fs, not a program.
backward compatible with ext2...
Backward compatible in that I can boot a tiny distro, or a linux BBC rescue, that only does ext2 and it will still read the ext3 filesystems... There are still a couple that don't come with reiser as a defualt yet, but it's getting better...