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 1Q1oCQ-0002xF-Rz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 23:07:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F9B91C0C6; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 23:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com (mail-qy0-f181.google.com [209.85.216.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F381C0C6 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 23:06:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyg14 with SMTP id 14so5507956qyg.19 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:06:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OuXIdePEJ/Hitht3hBY1tofyDpBCuzq56o9u5pSLC1I=; b=dCuyozU278S1gLrbXdeXqYuCcekPT6fba5RXS6Dz0iCBVuIZDyK53AGpA1MrJ9cFXE fp25CH19ojgpko0ZFG8CKfzIxZpXi0++yZl7XbwXJqYaWp5ChDqdWpgqfIti9Fywik2p olJ34SkZmAMEyMimBbFx61veZWZwoL9mr3AkE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=aE5R1ykM5J4ZIji1qwps3QQxNZ4X+CqR0J5iLOpDOOyI/VwFouPyT8p7qb2FdIMGdt m1r64+HOEMvYExtGnbDr5VoWH6McB+jUec25945twnEYNGE0mzLAbKE3JRLVmICBRqWb liagbVdDMm31dW9g7ZPtDbzBYi/2iuto6Xrvc= 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 Received: by 10.224.196.66 with SMTP id ef2mr3520928qab.248.1300748778371; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Sender: paul.hartman@gmail.com Received: by 10.229.250.141 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:06:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4D87C89D.7090007@gmail.com> References: <4D87A7C6.1060502@gmail.com> <4D87C89D.7090007@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:06:18 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: pCmoNnXubeMaOJFZ5cT6HRKuJEg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] the best filesystem for server: XFS or JFS (or?) From: Paul Hartman To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 93a027d9a8850c236126341e5b643ac5 On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Dale wrote: > Jarry wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm looking for "the best" filesystem for a small multi-purpose >> server with a couple of services running (ftp, web, mail, mysql). >> For me very important features are: >> >> snapshot (will be used for backup, must be native without lvm) >> journaling >> resizeable (if possible online) >> >> After a little research I have found two candidates: >> JFS (created by IBM) >> XFS (created by SGI) >> >> Now without trying to start flame-war, my question is: >> which of them could be better for my need? >> More stable, more reliable, more efficient, etc. >> Or should I consider some different filesystem? >> >> Jarry >> > > If you use XFS, make sure you have a UPS to prevent hard power offs. =A0I= used > XFS a good while back, every time the power would fail, it was toast. =A0= I > never did get it to rescue itself and ended up re-installing the OS. =A0I= t may > have changed but that was my experience with XFS. =A0It was fast and nice= but > it likes normal shutdowns. My anecdotal 2 cents: For JFS, I used it on 2 systems and both were ruined by crash/power-failure, journal replay failed, repair caused millions of of JFS files to be renamed to inode number (or equally as useless filenames). File contents of those were basically okay, but I had no idea what they were or where they came from. Making an index of all files in your system with full path and filename, filesize and hash and storing it on another machine would help to match those files to their original names in the event of a crash. This was about 5 years ago so maybe JFS's crash recovery is more robust now, I don't know because I have avoided it ever since. I used XFS on a drive which had a bad cable and offlined itself in the middle of an operation, it wouldn't mount and fsck didn't fix it, which was scary, but using the xfs tools I was able to repair it enough to mount read-only and copy all my files off to another disk, then replaced the cable and reformatted the bad drive. So XFS got positive marks for being recoverable, negative marks for failing to recover itself. But in the end I was able to get my files in their original names and locations, which was better than JFS. :) Now for the past couple years I use ext4 everywhere and have suffered dozens of crashes and power failures without incident (laptop with dead battery and lack of power management, crazy nvidia-drivers problems on desktop machine, UPS that died during a storm...). For me, ext4 has been unbreakable so far. Fingers crossed. :)