LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
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 01-18-2011, 10:42 PM   #1
wdhpr
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Location: North Coast
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.10
Posts: 32

Rep: Reputation: 1
What is the best file system for Linux?


I'm looking for peoples opinion on which file system they use for their Linux platform and why?

I have used fat32, ext2,3,4 and I am currently back to using ext3.

I have been reading up on the subject. Opinions are diverse as they are plentiful.
Several websites I have found are interesting.

Ext3 and Ext4: Which file system to install? April 2009

Ext3 vs Ext4 April 2009

What is ext3?Oct2004

Wikipedia The ext4 or fourth extended filesystem ongoing

Heres a comparison chart of all the file systems. I had no idea there were so many :O

To be perfectly honest I can only understand bits and pieces of whats in these articles as they use some technical language that goes over this novices head. So I was wondering if someone could explain this in everyday terms that we all can understand?

Wdhpr

Last edited by wdhpr; 01-18-2011 at 10:47 PM.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 11:01 PM   #2
jefro
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,101

Rep: Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552
I can't say but, I haven't used fat on linux since zipslack.

You'd have to exactly describe your use's and the file sizes and maybe even the hard drive to be sure.

I'd say to stick with the default choice in the installer.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 11:11 PM   #3
grail
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Perth
Distribution: Manjaro
Posts: 9,552

Rep: Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898Reputation: 2898
I agree with jefro that usage and requirements are the driving factors. For just plain working I would usually go with the default.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 11:12 PM   #4
wdhpr
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Location: North Coast
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.10
Posts: 32

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefro View Post
I can't say but, I haven't used fat on linux since zipslack.

You'd have to exactly describe your use's and the file sizes and maybe even the hard drive to be sure.

I'd say to stick with the default choice in the installer.
Not sure I understand.

I have a E-machine computer. With a AMD semperon processor with a Sata and a IDE hardrive 150 gigs each. I dual boot between Win xp 32 bit and Ubuntu also 32 bit. Nothing special. I just want some opinions on the file systems. For instance undeleting a file a on ext3 file systems is next to impossible. Mounting a ext3 file system within Windows is difficult. I just want some general opinions. Thanks for your response.

Wdhpr

Last edited by wdhpr; 01-18-2011 at 11:23 PM.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 11:23 PM   #5
matthewg42
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Distribution: Kubuntu 12.10 (using awesome wm though)
Posts: 3,530

Rep: Reputation: 63
Different filesystems have different strengths and weaknesses. You have in your second post, hinted that a reliable undelete would be nice, and that you want to mount the filesystem from a Windows instance, so good windows support for the filesystem in question should be available (I also have found that the ext[23] drivers for Vista are awful. If you could come up with other requirements it would help people to make good suggestions.

ext4 is now stable enough to be used by default on several distros, and has some advantages and disadvantages compared to ext3 and other common Linux filesystems.

As far as performance is concerned, it depends an awful lot on the specific load you have. For typical desktop operating system usage, any main-stream filesystem will probably do just fine. There are specific cases which should be noted though - especially if you have strange usage patterns. One example which springs to mind from a while ago is ext2 vs reiserfs when dealing with very large numbers of small files. In this case reiserfs is MUCH faster than ext2. Like I said, your mileage will vary depending on usage profile.
 
Old 01-18-2011, 11:33 PM   #6
wdhpr
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Location: North Coast
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.10
Posts: 32

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
Quote:
If you could come up with other requirements it would help people to make good suggestions.
Sorry ....and you are right.

Yes my requirements are not special. They are pretty much average for someone that dual boots between Linux and Windows xp. I can't mount my Linux partition from windows because of the size of... Can't remember right now but that Ubuntu's 10.10 is 512 and not 256. Anyway I am coming across issues that I didn't encounter when I used Simply Mepis 8.0 and from what I'm reading it has allot to do with my choice of the file system.

Cheers
Wdhpr

Last edited by wdhpr; 01-18-2011 at 11:34 PM.
 
Old 01-19-2011, 06:34 AM   #7
Larry Webb
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Crystal Beach, Texas
Distribution: Suse for mail +
Posts: 5,100
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 229Reputation: 229Reputation: 229
The simple solution would be to make a separate data partition file system ntfs which most of the new linux distros will read and of course I believe your windows will read. If your linux distro will not read and write just install ntfs-3g and fuse.
 
Old 01-19-2011, 08:23 AM   #8
syg00
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Distribution: Lots ...
Posts: 15,956

Rep: Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211Reputation: 2211
NTFS (as suggested as a separate data partition) is a good option for sharing with Windoze. Be aware that if there are filesystem errors, you can only fix it from Windoze.
Not a problem in your case.
 
Old 01-19-2011, 12:04 PM   #9
wdhpr
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Location: North Coast
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.10
Posts: 32

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
thanks for all your responses

I can mount my ntfs partition just fine within ubuntu. I cant mount my Linux partition from within windows because of Ubuntu's inode size.

Inode count: 1452480
Inodes per group: 8160
Inode blocks per group: 510
Inode size: 256

From what I understand windows will have a problem with inode sizes greater than 128.
This is what I couldn't remember in my previous post. Either way, if I have too I can boot Puppy linux from my USB stick and I can access both Linux file and windows files.

I may only boot into windows once or twice a week. Because I can do things better with windows than Linux. Mostly ripping DVDs, disk burning and working with media files.You see I don't believe most people will just give up their windows for now and if Linux systems wont play nice with windows, IMO Linux will be on the short end of things. Again just my opinion.

The purpose for this thread was to invite opinions on Linux file systems and what works best for others.

I will stick with ext3 for now and will eventually be going back to ext4.

Anyway thanks for your input.

Wdhpr
 
Old 01-19-2011, 12:34 PM   #10
diamondsandrain
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2009
Location: Canada
Distribution: Gentoo, Slackware, Arch
Posts: 97

Rep: Reputation: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewg42 View Post
Different filesystems have different strengths and weaknesses. You have in your second post, hinted that a reliable undelete would be nice
extundelete isn't good enough? http://extundelete.sourceforge.net/

I've had great success with it. I generally have my filesystem split so that the much more active root partition wouldn't be with the generic storage, so there is a lower likelihood of files being overwritten before you can recover them. I've used the tool with no command options and its recovered hundreds of gigabytes ranging from the immediately deleted to stuff I haven't seen in possibly months. I have much more success with that tool than I've had with any windows tools for recovering data. It claims to work with 2/3/4. I found it through the Arch forums. Its in their repositories so possibly its in the repositories for other distributions as well?
 
Old 01-19-2011, 01:16 PM   #11
lazlow
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,362

Rep: Reputation: 172Reputation: 172
wdhpr

One of the reasons I am against dual booting is becuase people often fall into the trap you are now in. Rather than learning how to effectively use the linux applications(ripping DVDs, disk burning and working with media files) they just use the windows one. For instance k3b is probably one of the best disk burning applications (on any platform) out there. DVD::rip does a wonderful (and fast) job of ripping DVDs. I like Avidedmux for converting video images but their are a lot of others depending on your specific needs. The other trap windows people fall into is to try and think windows and run Linux, that will never work very well. One has to learn to think Linux in order to effectively run Linux(just like learning to speak another language effectively, like German)
 
Old 01-19-2011, 02:22 PM   #12
mostlyharmless
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Distribution: Arch/Slackware/Knoppix
Posts: 1,783
Blog Entries: 14

Rep: Reputation: 279Reputation: 279Reputation: 279
You can use an inode size of 128 with ext3, it just takes a little more work at installation. That would solve your access problem, and the undelete issue was addressed above.
 
Old 01-19-2011, 02:31 PM   #13
Larry Webb
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Crystal Beach, Texas
Distribution: Suse for mail +
Posts: 5,100
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 229Reputation: 229Reputation: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazlow View Post
wdhpr

One of the reasons I am against dual booting is becuase people often fall into the trap you are now in. Rather than learning how to effectively use the linux applications(ripping DVDs, disk burning and working with media files) they just use the windows one. For instance k3b is probably one of the best disk burning applications (on any platform) out there. DVD::rip does a wonderful (and fast) job of ripping DVDs. I like Avidedmux for converting video images but their are a lot of others depending on your specific needs. The other trap windows people fall into is to try and think windows and run Linux, that will never work very well. One has to learn to think Linux in order to effectively run Linux(just like learning to speak another language effectively, like German)
First I will say I do not dual boot
A lot of what you say is correct but
there are programs designed for windows that have not for linux such as Quickbooks and tax programs.
There is also equipment such as printers, which is the main reason I dual booted for about five years till that expensive canon printer wore out.
 
Old 01-19-2011, 02:39 PM   #14
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288Reputation: 1288
For performance: XFS or JFS.
 
Old 01-19-2011, 02:46 PM   #15
lazlow
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,362

Rep: Reputation: 172Reputation: 172
Larry Webb

There is gnucash and many others to replace Quickbooks(just google quickbooks on linux). Most of the major tax software are pushing online use pretty hard. It is also fairly obvious to me that you have found ways around whatever issues you ran into as you are no longer dual booting. All I am saying is that by not dual booting one gets to that point much faster(adapt and overcome).
 
  


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
what is the file system used in linux system rajaneesh Linux - Kernel 3 10-31-2009 04:17 AM
Linpus Fedora after saving files to file system, CAN'T open FILE SYSTEM from desktop! remiwa Fedora 2 01-07-2009 08:28 AM
list file system linux supports "please give the command or system call" varun_shrivastava Linux - General 4 01-09-2007 08:28 AM
when does linux switch from realmode file system to protectedmode file system sitthar Linux - General 3 04-08-2006 09:05 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:41 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