LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 03-15-2013, 10:22 AM   #1
JWJones
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2009
Location: Cascadia
Distribution: Slackware, LinuxBBQ, OpenBSD, Mac OSX
Posts: 723

Rep: Reputation: 187Reputation: 187
File systems: which do you use, and why?


Ext4, xfs, btrfs, Reiser, etc.

Which do you use, and why? I'm particularly interested in hearing from slackers, but anyone is welcome to join in.

Last edited by JWJones; 03-15-2013 at 11:24 AM.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 10:26 AM   #2
mina86
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 414

Rep: Reputation: 173Reputation: 173
ext4, because it rox. But seriously: btrfs is unstable, raiser is unstable, anything else is either unstable or just plain weird.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 10:38 AM   #3
tronayne
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Northeastern Michigan, where Carhartt is a Designer Label
Distribution: Slackware 32- & 64-bit Stable
Posts: 3,122

Rep: Reputation: 819Reputation: 819Reputation: 819Reputation: 819Reputation: 819Reputation: 819Reputation: 819
Here's something to mull over: Slackware defaults to ext4, Pat and crew do that, why?
 
Old 03-15-2013, 11:19 AM   #4
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Using ext4 for everything except my videos partition on my HTPC where I use xfs. The latter is much better at handling large files.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-15-2013, 11:30 AM   #5
jefro
Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,095

Rep: Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521
I still use ext2 on some things. Tended to use ext4 most often but now have begun using btrfs. I use zfs in bds always, or almost always.

The situation tends to cause the choice. As Woodsman points out, your use would help decide the filesystem. Again pointed out is that the distro's designers use a default. I'd assume that would create a better bug database to say default is more well tested.

Last edited by jefro; 03-15-2013 at 11:31 AM.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 11:34 AM   #6
afreitascs
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Brasil
Distribution: Slackware_Cur-64_mult
Posts: 433

Rep: Reputation: 30
I use ext4. I do not need to use another
 
Old 03-15-2013, 11:50 AM   #7
Didier Spaier
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slackware{,64}-{14.1,current} on a Lenovo Thinkpad W520
Posts: 4,679

Rep: Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240Reputation: 1240
Again?

I imagine answers will be close to the ones I received here even if the scope was only file-systems for root on Slackware.

Last edited by Didier Spaier; 03-15-2013 at 11:51 AM.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 11:52 AM   #8
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , MacPup,Linux-Lite 2.0, SaliX
Posts: 2,861
Blog Entries: 18

Rep: Reputation: 914Reputation: 914Reputation: 914Reputation: 914Reputation: 914Reputation: 914Reputation: 914Reputation: 914
Code:
# blkid
/dev/sda1: LABEL="PQSERVICE" UUID="84C0247FC0247996" TYPE="ntfs" 
/dev/sda2: LABEL="SYSTEM RESERVED" UUID="9C2425202424FF40" TYPE="ntfs" 
/dev/sda3: LABEL="Acer" UUID="6AC2CA02C2C9D28D" TYPE="ntfs" 
/dev/sda5: UUID="26a54718-3581-4c8b-958a-a03d4ce2b96f" TYPE="swap" 
/dev/sda6: LABEL="/" UUID="36c9c5bd-8611-475c-91ed-b13b8ecfe729" TYPE="ext4" 
/dev/sda7: LABEL="/home" UUID="55421c6b-4f54-41a2-979e-82ca2b7f2b1f" UUID_SUB="4a16b4e6-1f25-4024-9ebc-a6ff6b28c584" TYPE="btrfs"
I use ext2 file system on ssd because of writes. Plus my eeepc ssd's are old vs the newer ssd drives. Waiting on http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTI1OTU to replace using ext2 on my flash drives and ssd.

I only use btrfs on /home for now.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 12:10 PM   #9
flank'er
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2010
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 30

Rep: Reputation: 5
Reiserfs. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-15-2013, 12:14 PM   #10
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
I use JFS, because it's fast, has low CPU usage, and is stable from my experience with it for about 6 years i.e. I have never lost any data even after hard system crashes.

In case you are using SSD, JFS has excellent performance (one of the best if not the best) on SSDs and now supports TRIM:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...38_large&num=1
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-15-2013, 12:25 PM   #11
JWJones
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2009
Location: Cascadia
Distribution: Slackware, LinuxBBQ, OpenBSD, Mac OSX
Posts: 723

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 187Reputation: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
I imagine answers will be close to the ones I received here even if the scope was only file-systems for root on Slackware.
I had done a search prior to posting, but it didn't turn up this poll. Interesting, though, and helpful.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 03:59 PM   #12
T3slider
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1
Posts: 2,298

Rep: Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722
I only have anecdotal experience. I use XFS on my server and haven't had any problems. Even after a partial hard drive failure I was able to recover my data. My server has only suffered a power out once or twice (it is on a UPS so usually there's no problem) but I didn't experience any data loss on the few occasions it did go down. For my desktop, I used to use reiserfs and had no problems. I switched to ext4 when I reformatted just because ext4 is more flexible (ie it has more tools for online resizing/recovery). The only data corruption I have experienced was with an ext4 partition after a power out. (My desktop is now on a UPS too...) I cannot guarantee that another filesystem would have done any better but certainly I am not 100% confident in ext4's ability to recover after a hard reboot (though I do have enough faith to continue to use it). I have heard that reiserfs is not doing so well these days (due to neglect) but not having used it for some time that may be misinformation. I continue to stick to XFS on servers and ext4 on desktops.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 04:16 PM   #13
Ahau
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Distribution: Porteus, Slackware
Posts: 58

Rep: Reputation: 19
I run almost exclusively from flash media (usb flash and sdcards, no SSD's). I did a bit of testing a while back and found ext4 to have the best mix of speed, features and reliability/recoverability. At the time, I don't think btrfs had an fsck utility, but it was faster than ext4.

Nilfs2 and f2fs will be interesting to keep an eye on. I had a lot of fun playing with nilfs2, but until it's more stable and has dependable repair tools, it will remain a toy for me.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 04:38 PM   #14
whizje
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware64 current
Posts: 583

Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
I use ext4 I have experimented with xfs and if you proper configure it. It can be faster as ext4, but ext4 works excellent out of the box much more self configuring.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 06:05 PM   #15
qweasd
Member
 
Registered: May 2010
Posts: 486

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I used reiserfs in the past (for sentimental reasons, having met Hans Reiser briefly in Pereslavl-Zalesskiy, Russia), but now it's exclusively ext4, which seems to offer a good balance of performance and reliability.

Just recently the root partition on my server started to misbehave: it would remount read-only, and certain things (like print server) would stop working. I kept that thing going for a month by just fscking it a few times. And then the drive turned off forever. So ext4 got fixed on a failing drive some 4 times, and the server kept humming until the problem diagnosed itself.
 
  


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
How to use key file instead of password for LUKS encrypted file systems? lucmove Linux - Security 2 06-30-2009 10:17 AM
LXer: Kernel Log: What's coming in 2.6.30 - File systems: New and revamped file syste LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-28-2009 12:02 AM
Read only file systems, custom live CDs, and embedded systems coffeecoffee Linux - Newbie 2 02-25-2009 12:09 AM
LXer: Cluster File Systems Attains World Leadership Position In High Performance File System LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-14-2006 07:21 AM
Is arrangement of file systems will differ if we copy a file from FAT 32 to ext 3 ? anindyanuri Linux - Software 2 02-20-2005 12:39 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22 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
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration