[arch-dev-public] Devs choice of filesystems (was: [signoff] xfsprogs 2.9.5)
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :) I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis. -Dan
2008/2/9, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
Same here - ext3 everywhere except /boot which is ext2. :-) Even 2 terabytes storage on a hardware RAID5 in my ex-job had ext3, not XFS or JFS (thought maybe I would try JFS just out of curiosity if I had more time to play with such amount of space). I have tmpfs for /tmp, a 2GB swap partition and 2GB RAM, but only saw swap used once where I was doing something complex with really huge files (don't even remember what that was). -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
On Feb 8, 2008 5:50 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
I do the same: ext2 boot, ext3 for the rest. dir_index and noatime are both on. I do actually use tmpfs though. I used to use reiser as my main partition, with ext2 on /boot, but I switched at one point... I think actually for dual booting, because there were windows extensions that could read ext but not reiser. /me shrugs
On Feb 08, 2008 3:50 PM PST, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
ext2 /boot ext3 / (all defaults) I tend to go for the safest and most extensively tested option, especially where data integrity is concerned.
ext2 /boot ext3 / (all defaults)
I find it interesting that about 50% of the extX using devs use ext2 on /boot. Can someone elaborate as to why? And I'll weigh in as a ext3-only guy after experimenting with xfs and reiser and having nothing but corruption issues. Dale
On Feb 9, 2008 9:10 AM, Dale Blount <dale@archlinux.org> wrote:
ext2 /boot ext3 / (all defaults)
I find it interesting that about 50% of the extX using devs use ext2 on /boot. Can someone elaborate as to why?
The Arch Linux install guide (I think) told me that ext2 was a good pick for/ boot, and ext3 was rock-solid for everything else. I just did what someone told me! Seriously though, I think I would still use it just for the reason that I don't really need a journal on my /boot partition (saves a bit of space I would assume), and ext2 is about as solid of a FS as you can get. My /boot partition is only 32MB. I'd mount it as read-only all the time, but then kernel updates would be a pain and I'd forget to mount it read-write. I could write a pacman hook for that though... :P -Dan
2008/2/9, Dale Blount <dale@archlinux.org>:
ext2 /boot ext3 / (all defaults)
I find it interesting that about 50% of the extX using devs use ext2 on /boot. Can someone elaborate as to why?
Because there's no need to anything fancier for /boot? ext3 is basically just ext2+jounal, but I don't think journal is needed on /boot. *shrugs* -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
ext2 /boot ext3 everything else
On Feb 9, 2008 9:10 AM, Dale Blount <dale@archlinux.org> wrote:
ext2 /boot ext3 / (all defaults)
I find it interesting that about 50% of the extX using devs use ext2 on /boot. Can someone elaborate as to why?
Technically, it's faster. Mounting it doesn't need to do any journal shimmying, so it saves a few milliseconds. It's actually the same rationale for using a separate /boot - it's faster to mount a 100 MB partition than it is to mount a 120GB partition/disk. All-in-all though, these doesn't make a significant difference as boot-time bottlenecks happen at other places. I will point out though, that on my "omg fast boot" mythtv machine (which is now the arch64 build machine), I was able to save 2 seconds on boot by doing these tricks - I actually got it to boot to console login in 7 seconds. It was fun.
reiserfs on every partition here. no tmpfs. -Andy
Dan McGee schrieb:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I have ext3 for all partitions on three machines (even for /boot), all with dir_index. I have noatime active on most of them, and user_xattr,acl on some as well. I used to have a tmpfs for /tmp, but I think I dumped it completely.
Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2008 00:50:52 schrieb Dan McGee:
Let's get a quick poll going here.
I use ext3, jfs and reiserfs on various systems. Well, I wanted to try xfs, but grub is not able to boot from it. -- archlinux.de
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 09:31 +0100, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2008 00:50:52 schrieb Dan McGee:
Let's get a quick poll going here.
I use ext3, jfs and reiserfs on various systems. Well, I wanted to try xfs, but grub is not able to boot from it.
Grub can boot from XFS, it's just the fact that grub-install freezes your filesystem when doing that on an XFS filesystem. Copying the files by hand and installing grub by hand in the MBR should work (and be sure to install in MBR, installing in /dev/sda1 instead of /dev/sda will corrupt your XFS partition because XFS stores important data at that place)
Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2008 schrieb Jan de Groot:
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 09:31 +0100, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2008 00:50:52 schrieb Dan McGee:
Let's get a quick poll going here.
I use ext3, jfs and reiserfs on various systems. Well, I wanted to try xfs, but grub is not able to boot from it.
Grub can boot from XFS, it's just the fact that grub-install freezes your filesystem when doing that on an XFS filesystem. Copying the files by hand and installing grub by hand in the MBR should work (and be sure to install in MBR, installing in /dev/sda1 instead of /dev/sda will corrupt your XFS partition because XFS stores important data at that place)
hey guys this is fixed since a long time in setup! Use latest ISOs and it works greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
On 2/8/08, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
ext3 on everything (yes, and /boot) ...with dir_index, full journaling (journal_data), and noatime.
Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2008 schrieb Dan McGee:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
-Dan
Hi I use always ext2 for /boot and reiserfs for / and /home no tmpfs on 3 machines i run it in RAID 1 greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 05:50:52PM -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on encrypted "/" using default attributes: has_journal resize_inode dir_index filetype needs_recovery sparse_super large_file I also use ext3 on "/boot" and "/tmp", because tmpfs crashed (although size limited to half of memory) my box under high memory consumption. ext3 is the most commonly used filesystem on Linux on thus well tested in many not so common configurations (like DRBD). Jürgen
I use ext3 with full journaling and user_xattr on /, and I use ext2 on /boot. I've never had compelling reasons to change. // jeff -- . : [ + carpe diem totus tuus + ] : .
Dan McGee wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
We use xfs on our new fileservers. Testing revealed it's was the fastest under our conditions, by a significant margin. We use ext3 other places, except in scenarios where there will be lots of small files, in which case we favor reiserfs. I used to use reiserfs for almost everything, but ext3 seems essentially as good in most cases and the most reliable/stable of the bunch. There was one big xfs corruption issue about a year or so ago, which is scary, but is has been otherwise very stable. I've had some problems with reiserfs corruption, but they've been in very rare circumstances where it also wasn't clear there wasn't some bad hardware involved. - P
2008/2/9, Paul Mattal <paul@mattal.com>:
We use xfs on our new fileservers. Testing revealed it's was the fastest under our conditions, by a significant margin.
We use ext3 other places, except in scenarios where there will be lots of small files, in which case we favor reiserfs. I used to use reiserfs for almost everything, but ext3 seems essentially as good in most cases and the most reliable/stable of the bunch.
There was one big xfs corruption issue about a year or so ago, which is scary, but is has been otherwise very stable. I've had some problems with reiserfs corruption, but they've been in very rare circumstances where it also wasn't clear there wasn't some bad hardware involved.
Just out of curiosity - did you compare XFS to JFS and what results you've observed? -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Roman Kyrylych wrote:
2008/2/9, Paul Mattal <paul@mattal.com>:
We use xfs on our new fileservers. Testing revealed it's was the fastest under our conditions, by a significant margin.
We use ext3 other places, except in scenarios where there will be lots of small files, in which case we favor reiserfs. I used to use reiserfs for almost everything, but ext3 seems essentially as good in most cases and the most reliable/stable of the bunch.
There was one big xfs corruption issue about a year or so ago, which is scary, but is has been otherwise very stable. I've had some problems with reiserfs corruption, but they've been in very rare circumstances where it also wasn't clear there wasn't some bad hardware involved.
Just out of curiosity - did you compare XFS to JFS and what results you've observed?
JFS performance is generally good, in fact it was the fastest of any for large big writes (writing many-gigabyte files sequentially). However, under the bonnie++ mixed-bag performance tests, both locally and over NFS, the xfs performance stats were faster, though anecdotally seemed to consume more processor. JFS, I believe, is also hands-down the fastest at deleting even an extremely large file. - P
JFS performance is generally good, in fact it was the fastest of any for large big writes (writing many-gigabyte files sequentially).
However, under the bonnie++ mixed-bag performance tests, both locally and over NFS, the xfs performance stats were faster, though anecdotally seemed to consume more processor.
JFS, I believe, is also hands-down the fastest at deleting even an extremely large file.
ps. I love the term 'mixed-bag'.
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 05:50:52PM -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
I'm one of the few single-partitioners these days. My laptop just has a / and it's ext3. I haven't had a /boot partition since I used old versions of lilo! At one point or another I've tried jfs and reiser but both of them corrupted as badly as ext3 and were harder to fix. Jason
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
ext3 on all partitions /boot is not separate. I actually never bothered trying other systems, just used ext2 when ext3 wasn't there yet. It actually never failed on me. Looking at this poll, we seem to be a pretty conservative bunch :P -T
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 17:01 -0800, Tobias Kieslich wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
ext3 on all partitions /boot is not separate. I actually never bothered trying other systems, just used ext2 when ext3 wasn't there yet. It actually never failed on me.
Same here. Ext3 for everything and haven't had a /boot since lilo was fixed years ago.
Looking at this poll, we seem to be a pretty conservative bunch :P
-T
-- K. Piche <kpiche@rogers.com>
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008 4:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure we have devs that use XFS, right?
I actually wonder what you guys do use. I'm guessing 75% of us use ext2/ext3. Let's get a quick poll going here. :)
I use ext3 on my two boxes with dir_index turned on for all partitions, and some have noatime in the mount options. /boot is the exception, which is ext2. Finally, I don't have a tmpfs for /tmp on either box, due to the fact that I tend to stick large stuff there and I'd rather not swap on a regular basis.
-Dan
I use ext3 with defaults options for all my partitions, including /boot. I use tmpfs for my /tmp. Also, my x86_64 box is a RAID5 and LVM setup. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
participants (19)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Andreas Radke
-
Dale Blount
-
Dan McGee
-
eliott
-
Eric Belanger
-
Jan de Groot
-
Jason Chu
-
Jeff Mickey
-
Jürgen Hötzel
-
K. Piche
-
Paul Mattal
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Roman Kyrylych
-
Thayer Williams
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tobias Kieslich
-
Tobias Powalowski
-
Travis Willard