Filesystem recommendations
in [Debian]
|
Prev: overcoming the 32k objects limit is ext3 - which file system to use?
Next: Why is Acroversion not properly updated?
From: Stan Hoeppner on 29 Apr 2010 08:40 Rob Owens put forth on 4/28/2010 8:26 PM: > Many/most > users don't run a UPS and sudden unexpected power loss is a real > possibility for them. Really? I was under the impression that laptops and netbooks are now the primary computer of well over 50% of users worldwide (not counting smart phones). Laptops have a built-in UPS. In the U.S., given the numbers of cheap APC, Triplite, and Belkin UPS on the shelves at $big_box_store I'd say most U.S. desktop users have a UPS. I know I do. Pretty much every computer user I know personally has a UPS. In other parts of the world I'm sure there are many people who can barely afford a PC let alone a UPS. Used laptops are a great fit for those users, assuming the batteries aren't shot. Don't read me wrong. I'm not advocating XFS on laptops, although I do know of many folks who use it on laptops. For the average user there would be little performance benefit. For power users it's a valid possible choice. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4BD97D57.6010402(a)hardwarefreak.com
From: John Hasler on 29 Apr 2010 09:30 Stan Hoeppner > I'd say most U.S. desktop users have a UPS. I'd say most home desktop users and the majority of small businesses don't. > I know I do. I don't. I can't afford it (and I've never lost important data in a power failure (but then I have little important data to lose)). > Pretty much every computer user I know personally has a UPS. No non-power-user I know has one. Most don't know what one is. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87633a5rwr.fsf(a)thumper.dhh.gt.org
From: Rob Owens on 29 Apr 2010 09:50 On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 07:36:39AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Rob Owens put forth on 4/28/2010 8:26 PM: > > Many/most > > users don't run a UPS and sudden unexpected power loss is a real > > possibility for them. > > Really? I was under the impression that laptops and netbooks are now the > primary computer of well over 50% of users worldwide (not counting smart > phones). Laptops have a built-in UPS. In the U.S., given the numbers of > cheap APC, Triplite, and Belkin UPS on the shelves at $big_box_store I'd say > most U.S. desktop users have a UPS. I know I do. Pretty much every > computer user I know personally has a UPS. In other parts of the world I'm > sure there are many people who can barely afford a PC let alone a UPS. Used > laptops are a great fit for those users, assuming the batteries aren't shot. > I only know for sure of one friend who has a UPS. He's the sysadmin for his company. I don't even have one, and I know better! Good point about laptops and netbooks, though. By the way, I use XFS on my MythTV storage drive and I haven't had any problem w/ data loss due to power outages. It has happened to me several times, though, when I was using JFS. That's why I switched to XFS. (I chose JFS and XFS over EXT3 in this case, due to their ability to very quickly delete large files). -Rob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100429134508.GA10624(a)aurora.owens.net
From: Stephen Powell on 29 Apr 2010 10:00 On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 09:07:00 -0400 (EDT), John Hasler wrote: > Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> I'd say most U.S. desktop users have a UPS. > > I'd say most home desktop users and the majority of small > businesses don't. >> >> I know I do. > > I don't. I can't afford it (and I've never lost important data in a > power failure (but then I have little important data to lose)). >> >> Pretty much every computer user I know personally has a UPS. > > No non-power-user I know has one. Most don't know what one is. I agree with John. Stan must hobnob with an elite crowd. I don't have a UPS at home either, and I don't know anyone that does. I do have one at work, but even there most desktop systems aren't on it. The only reason that my desktop system uses the UPS is that my cubicle is on raised floor inside the computer room and I connected it myself. Most desktop users, even at the office, are not so privileged. And my employer is a very big entity, financially. It's not a small business. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1610864438.83570.1272549043508.JavaMail.root(a)md01.wow.synacor.com
From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. on 29 Apr 2010 10:20
On Wednesday 28 April 2010 20:26:46 Rob Owens wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 08:28:37AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > > Javier Barroso put forth on 4/26/2010 6:56 AM: > > > Why Debian Installer doesn't change its default filesystem to xfs if > > > it is better than ext3 / ext4? I think always is better stick to > > > defaults if it is possible > > > > If one disk filesystem was better than all the others in all ways, then > > Linus would only allow one FS in the kernel tree. As of 2.6.33 there are > > no less than 7 stable primary disk filesystems offered in the kernel. > > Your question is a bit simplistic, and not really valid. There is no > > single "perfect" filesystem. IMO, for servers anyway, XFS is pretty > > close. > > > > Newbies _should_ always stick to defaults. Experts install with expert > > mode, and choose exactly what they want/need. > > > > I didn't write the Debian installer so I can't tell you why EXT is the > > default. I can only speculate. Thankfully the installer offers us > > expert mode so we can do whatever we want. In this regard, I guess the > > Debian team considers EXT the best choice for non-experts. > > If I'm right that EXT3 has superior resilience to power loss (see my > othe post in this thread) , then that > fact alone makes it a good choice for default filesystem. Ext3 basically syncs to disk every 5 seconds or so. Ext4 didn't, but it's possible that has been / will be put back. XFS uses longer gaps between disk syncs by default, but it is tunable. You could always use the "sync" file system option to avoid the whole issue. If that's no good enough, a simple shell script (while sleep 5; do sync; done) running as root (perhaps started from init) will fill basically the same role. Both XFS and Ext3/4 recover through journal replay, and it is usually enough. Rarely, a manual filesystem check will be required, and xfs_check is usually much faster than fsck.ext3 or even fsck.ext4. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss(a)iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/ |