[rescue] Linux FSs
alaric at metrocast.net
Thu Dec 4 18:37:39 CST 2008
Saquinn624 at aol.com wrote:
> All the recent talk about IRIX vs Linux (specifically the XFS part) got me
> wondering about the various filesystems for Linux, and it doesn't look like
> there's much recent information in the wild about how the various options compare
> in real life (also I'm not quite technically into it enough to figure out some
> of the bits).
> So: it looks like XFS is probably not the best option, so that seems to leave
> JFS and possibly AdvFS in the running for high-performance filesystems (at
> least until (and if) ZFS makes it into Linux).
> What does the list think?
For my money, JFS is the way to go on Linux right now. ext2/ext3 are
stablew but slow and antiquated; ReiserFS has always been of suspect
reliability, and has horribly high CPU utilization for delete
operations; XFS, as previously noted, is not fully supported on Linux.
The rest are pretty much bit players (so to speak).
Phil Stracchino, CDK#2 DoD#299792458 ICBM: 43.5607, -71.355
alaric at caerllewys.net alaric at metrocast.net phil at co.ordinate.org
Renaissance Man, Unix ronin, Perl hacker, Free Stater
It's not the years, it's the mileage.
More information about the rescue