Very Computer

by **Frank Ratzlo** » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 08:12:47

Hi,

we are going to setup a fileserver with a volume/partition size of about 1
TB. I checked there are the following large journaling fs available:
ext3
jfs
xfs

Can anyone give me a hint which one best to use? We will produce a lot of
large tif files. What is the tool support of these fs about? How stable are
they? What about ACLs (as UFS has)? What about performance? ... in a Samba
and NFS environment?

Any comments welcome

TIA

Frank

by **P60** » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 11:56:51

My experience with reisefs is very good, excelent, but I don't know for 1
Tb.
Arne

by **John Murtar** » Thu, 07 Feb 2002 02:43:09

> My experience with reisefs is very good, excelent, but I don't know for 1
> Tb.
> Arne

We are using RedHat 7.2 and ext3 journalling -- we have some 25Gig
filesystems and haven't had any problems. Be sure to mount the
filesystem with "noatime" -- that will make a BIG difference.

Hope this helps.
John Murtari
http://www.thebook.com/

by **Don Capp** » Thu, 07 Feb 2002 07:13:49

You might want to take a peek at:

http://www.osdl.org/reports/

This is a nice performance comparison for many of the
filesystems you are thinking of using.

Enjoy,
Don Capps

Quote:> Hi,

> we are going to setup a fileserver with a volume/partition size of about 1
> TB. I checked there are the following large journaling fs available:
> ext3
> jfs
> xfs

> Can anyone give me a hint which one best to use? We will produce a lot of
> large tif files. What is the tool support of these fs about? How stable
are
> they? What about ACLs (as UFS has)? What about performance? ... in a Samba
> and NFS environment?

> Any comments welcome

> TIA

> Frank

by **John Evan** » Thu, 07 Feb 2002 11:09:10

> we are going to setup a fileserver with a volume/partition size of about 1
> TB. I checked there are the following large journaling fs available:
> ext3
> jfs
> xfs

Don't forget to take a look at ReiserFS also. But it really depends on what
you're going to be doing with the filesystem. Each fs has its own strengths
and weaknesses.

Quote:> Can anyone give me a hint which one best to use? We will produce a lot of
> large tif files. What is the tool support of these fs about? How stable are
> they? What about ACLs (as UFS has)? What about performance? ... in a Samba
> and NFS environment?

Now, since you mentioned that you'll be working with large tiff files, xfs most
likely would be your best choice. Its the best of the 4 main journaling fs
(from the various stuff that I'v read) for working with large files. It also
does support ACLs, also ACLs with samba. And it works very nicely with NFS.
Its tools are really nice (its repair tool (xfs_repair) has saved me a couple
of times).

But I will admit that I'm a little bias (in xfs's favour).

The following two links should give you more then enough information on making
a final choice about which fs to use.

http://bulmalug.net/body.phtml?nIdNoticia=1154
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/l-fs9.html?d...

--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12

G++ e h! !r !y+
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|John Evans | It's unlawful to set a mousetrap without |

+------------------------------------------------------------------+

Very Computer

experiences with large (journaling) filesystems wanted

experiences with large (journaling) filesystems wanted

experiences with large (journaling) filesystems wanted

experiences with large (journaling) filesystems wanted

experiences with large (journaling) filesystems wanted

experiences with large (journaling) filesystems wanted