SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.