What is the "market share" of the different Filesystems (ext3, ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS). Make a guess
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: How to mount ALL partitions of a new hard disc at once?
Next: What is the "market share" of the different Filesystems (ext3,ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS). Make a guess
From: Peter Hanke on 29 Jul 2010 06:37 I wonder what the "market shares" is of all the filesystems out there in the real Linux world: (ext3, ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS) Ok there are no exact statistics. But make a guess. What would you think? Are there at least any rough guidelines depending on the distribution? E.g. Ubuntu 98% ext4 or RedHat 95% Reiser? Peter
From: John Hasler on 29 Jul 2010 08:53 Peter Hanke wrote: > I wonder what the "market shares" is of all the filesystems out there > in the real Linux world: (ext3, ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS) > Ok there are no exact statistics. But make a guess. Ok. 60%, 36%, 1%, 1%, 1%, 1%. Here's another guess: 16%, 16%, 16%, 16%, 16%, 16%, 4% ("other") -- John Hasler jhasler(a)newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
From: Aragorn on 29 Jul 2010 19:36 On Thursday 29 July 2010 12:37 in comp.os.linux.misc, somebody identifying as Peter Hanke wrote... > I wonder what the "market shares" is of all the filesystems out there > in the real Linux world: (ext3, ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS) > Ok there are no exact statistics. But make a guess. > > What would you think? > > Are there at least any rough guidelines depending on the distribution? > E.g. > > Ubuntu 98% ext4 > or > RedHat 95% Reiser? I don't think it's distribution-specific, although with regard to your mention of RedHat, I must say that the installer in RedHat, CentOS and Fedora - I believe it's called Anaconda - refuses to let you install the operating system on anything other than ext2 or ext3 (and possibly ext4 now), even though their kernel supports reiserfs, xfs and jfs as well. That said, I think that ext3 is at this stage probably the most used filesystem in GNU/Linux because most distributions default to it, and most people - especially newbies - tend to stick to whatever defaults the distribution offers, especially with regard to stuff that's not "clickable" and "desktop-related". On the other hand, the more professional and more seasoned sysadmins - or at least: those who do not use RedHat/CentOS/Fedora - will often opt for an industry-standard filesystem such as xfs or jfs, but just as many server environments will be using ext3; ext4 is probably still too new for wide-scale adoption. reiserfs was the default in SuSE once and in one or two older Mandrake distributions, but I believe that this is no longer the case now. reiserfs is also somewhat deprecated because although its performance is pretty good, it lacks a decent toolchain, is likely to screw up after an unclean shutdown, and is no longer being actively developed due to its chief developer currently staying at the grey bar hotel due to having disposed of his estranged wife in a rather irreversible manner. reiserfs has a successor, reiser4, which works quite differently and offers very high throughput, but its development has halted for the same reasons as mentioned above. reiser4 is also not part of the upstream Linux kernel and although some distributions might offer it via their own patched distro-specific kernels, I believe that, given its premature halt in development, it will most likely be missing out on the same set of tools that reiserfs is lacking, and that reiser4 will probably still not be stable enough to recommend it for any mission-critical environments. As for what filesystem you should choose, this depends entirely upon your needs. Some things fare better on xfs or jfs, others might fare better on ext3 or ext4. There are various benchmarks available for scrutiny on the internet, but all they can really show you is that there is no such thing as a "one size fits all". In addition to that, a single GNU/Linux system may be using all of the supported filesystems together because of the POSIX-native property that many branches of the filesystem hierarchy can be distributed across multiple partitions, which may reside on the same or multiple hard disks, which may in turn even be physically located in another computer on the network. That all said, I personally have a preference for xfs. It has been the default filesystem in SGI's IRIX since 1996, it is mature, stable, extremely fast for high-throughput environments, and it comes with a complete and powerful toolchain. Not all of the features of IRIX's version of xfs have been ported to the Linux kernel yet - and quite possibly, some might never be due to licensing restrictions - but these missing features are things I personally have no need for. (Disclaimer: xfs should only be used on a system that's hooked up to a UPS (or on a laptop with a decent battery), but then again, this is a rule that basically applies to every modern operating system, regardless of what filesystem it uses.) As for guessing about the statistics, your guess is as good as mine, and statistics have always been very proficient liars. ;-) I don't even understand why you would want to know the numbers. ;-) -- *Aragorn* (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
From: Rahul on 29 Jul 2010 21:36 The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in news:i2s29u$5cp$2 @news.albasani.net: >> I have no idea. I run ext3 on most of my partitions, but ext2 on /boot >> and my database stuff (that does its own logging). Since I run only Red >> Hat, I normally use whatever they supply. Since 2000, I believe, they >> supply ext3 by default (others are available). Before that, maybe it was >> ext2 -- I do not remember. But whatever they supply, I used. >> >> But that is only one data point. When they come up with Red Hat >> Enterprise Linux 6, I suppose the default will be ext4. >> > Similar here. > > I'm curious: Why do you still your ext2 for logging and databases? Is there a specific performance or other reason? -- Rahul
From: Rahul on 29 Jul 2010 21:39
peter_ha(a)andres.net (Peter Hanke) wrote in news:4c5159cd$0$7666$9b4e6d93(a)newsspool1.arcor-online.net: > I wonder what the "market shares" is of all the filesystems out there > in the real Linux world: (ext3, ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS) > Ok there are no exact statistics. But make a guess. > I'm using ext3 throughout. Thought about shifting to ext4 a while ago but was scared by some reports of bugs relating to caching the journal or some such. Forgot exactly but there was a detailed post by Theodore Tso on his blog. But then again, I think I read about google deciding to switch to ext4 so I guess it must be pretty stable now. -- Rahul |