From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NxjZj-0005u2-0Q for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 16:18:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 625D2E08AB; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 16:17:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gy0-f181.google.com (mail-gy0-f181.google.com [209.85.160.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41C12E08AB for ; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 16:17:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gyg8 with SMTP id 8so969374gyg.40 for ; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:17:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=m58FOw+0FnF44SQ+dsXeK/q4Y0/utffWSyDTJZU7L04=; b=T4JP7YjVQbo6dYwOti0Aej3os9xyldq4AN3d8q0Hs3WJXghD7WgG8g2Bq8w8B1blXK mDdOqCjw5bYW6nyPSfrQIC9aMOU2df8bBy7mQ81oH88Z1dv+2caMqVigceoLo/4Iqb9E dp9+0y5aFZeLpUF10B9fGQe1fK1m4bblpYRFk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=aoakJ2BT1Zwa2UTpgQ0qbMhTrZIDI3VEaqgAzInrzDXPPhWo3wf8WdG6X9r+3JFS4q 12JPOxo55EIIRB74H5LUuSFXxHiWAuZG+73Q3yCpygJ2cSnJ1DZ8Nrw51dmHo0I9wkg+ LldS5/Dj5EG79AmumDz+lS1svT8RrOvOQiU/0= Received: by 10.150.168.32 with SMTP id q32mr3082126ybe.88.1270225070841; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (adsl-0-116-39.jan.bellsouth.net [65.0.116.39]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 15sm6326315gxk.2.2010.04.02.09.17.49 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:17:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BB618AC.7050200@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:17:48 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100330 Gentoo/2.0.3 SeaMonkey/2.0.3 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] OT:Choosing a filesystem References: <20100401174711.GA5120@solfire> <20100402095013.1f642102@digimed.co.uk> <4BB60D2B.1020808@gmail.com> <201004021639.40475.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201004021639.40475.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4d0f0fa9-f34c-49ea-b22a-01b92d543d35 X-Archives-Hash: 210cba2c6b3dafaf6072dc78ee2d110a Mick wrote: > On Friday 02 April 2010 16:28:43 Dale wrote: > >> Neil Bothwick wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:09:30 +0200, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote: >>> >>>> Then: I often transer videos from my DVB-T-receiver/recorder >>>> > to my > >>>> harddisk to cut out the advertising and to transcode the >>>> > videos to > >>>> somethings better than "ts" (transport streams), >>>> >>> These tend to be bigger, often in the GB range, so I'd use a >>> > separate > >>> filesystem for them with XFS, which handles large files >>> > better in my > >>> experience. >>> >> He mentioned in one of the first few posts that he regularly >> > has hard > >> shutdowns. I took that as pulling the plug. The last bit of >> > experience > >> I had with XFS, it does not like that sort of thing to happen. >> > Each > >> time I had a hard shutdown, I had to reinstall the OS. Has XFS >> > changed > >> so that power loss is not s problem or should he not use this >> > after all? > >> Would hate for the OP to use XFS if it has not improved in that >> > area. > > XFS was ropey in its early days. I had to re-install a partition > once too (on a laptop!). It is much more stable now (have not > had a problem in the last 4+ years). > > reiserfs is absolutely bullet proof here, with hundreds of > crashes on a machine that had bad memory (like twice or three > times a day I would have to pull the plug, for months on end > until I isolated the error on a memory module). > > reiser4 seems to be on a class of its own in terms of > performance. Perhaps not as forgiving on hard crashes as the > reiserfs? Not sure. It's early days yet on this machine, but I > have only praises for it so far. I just hope they incorporate it > in the kernel so that I don't have to manually patch it every > time. > > This is just my 2c's - so YMMV. > I haven't used XFS in several years. I was hoping that it had improved. I just wanted to make sure that it had improved and that it would be safe considering the OP has hard shutdowns. I wouldn't want the OP to use it if he would lose data the first time he had a hard shutdown. That would pretty much suck. I agree on reiserfs tho. I use it a lot here as well. It works very well for me. Dale :-) :-)