ReiserFS vs XFS or JFS?

["markw-4" <user=5@nabble.blu.org>]

 I'm not a big fan of EXT[3|4] except as the boot partition as that is not 
very dynamic. I have been using IBM jfs for a long time now and find it 
better/faster/etc than EXT3, even on database, web, and mail servers. 

IMHO: 
EXT2 is great for a database journal in that you won't be double 
journalling. (I often speculate that a very minimal UNIX file system 
designed for purely for speed and regularly sized blocks, something like a 
streamlined FAT system, would be awesome for databases.) 

EXT3 is good for system boot partitions as it does not need fsck on on a 
restart and the volume is likely not very dynamic. 

ReiserFS (last I did any research) was pretty good when you had a lot of 
small files. 

IBM JFS, again, last time I did any testing, was a better choice for a 
generic file system as it had a pretty good balance of journal speed and 
large vs small file storage/access. 

SGI's XFS I sort of abandoned (I admit I was a wimp) because I thought IBM 
jfs would have better and more active development. 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is 
believed to be clean. 

_______________________________________________ 
Discuss mailing list 
[hidden email] 
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss