Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
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.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
After reading bazillon posts about corrupted Reiser and having some unpleasant experience myself I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. XFS - if performance is paramount (must have an UPS), ext3 - good strong filesystem for everybody else.
Hmm... I have mostly read about ext3 handling crashes badly and XFS becoming corrupted :S But would still like to know why ext3 is missing 16gb formatted space, that can't be right.
As it is now, Reiserfs 3.6 use the full space while v4 and ext3 does not!
And I do not trust that test 100%, it is made with a 500Mhz P3 and the best filesystems have a fairly large cpu overhead AFAIK.
I do not remember reading XFS becoming corrupted, quite many are complaining it loses data changes made within last (up to 10) minutes in case of sudden power loss. Large CPU overhead is not a plus in my book. In other words, if a filesystem handling causes large overhead it cannot be best. Your lost 16 GB (gb is gram-bit) is probably space allocated to journal data. ext3 with sync transfers turned on is most reliable filesystem out there AFAIK - slower though than async (Linux default). Formatting with -m 0 will lead to fragmentation, but I think you know it.
The choice is yours of course. BTW, Reiser 4 does not support extended attributes, another minus.
I only tried -m 0 to rule out that it could be the source of error But still, 16GB journal data, thats a hell lot of data
Anyway I did discard XFS due to the fact that I do not have an UPS, but then again, my server is mostly fileserver (that uses /home, all others are using ext3) and not much are written to it. Will it be safe to assume that the data have actually been written after, lets say 5-10 minutes?
I believe so, and it certainly is written when partition is unmounted as it happens during normal shutdown. In general it seems everyone has his/her own opinion on filesystem choice and what I believe is not necessarily best for you. I just wanted to bring your attention to the fact ext3 and XFS both have developed well lately, in particular ext3 has some killer improvements.
Then I will try and make some tests to see if XFS and I will get along Does XFS/ext3 support on-the-fly compression of the content? (I believe that ReiserFS do, at least for v4)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.