What is the "market share" of the different Filesystems (ext3,ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS). Make a guess
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: What is the "market share" of the different Filesystems (ext3, ext4, Reiser, JFS, XFS, VxFS). Make a guess
Next: html to video?
From: Michael Black on 29 Jul 2010 11:30 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, J G Miller wrote: > On Thursday, July 29th, 2010 at 10:37:01h +0000, Peter Hanke wrote: >> >> What would you think? > > I think it does not matter. > > Furthermore the market share of the reiser file system dropped dramatically > when openSUSE dropped reiserfs as a standard option for installation. > I thought when the Reiser, or whoever, went to prison for killing his wife, "market share" dropped off. Uncertainty that it would be going anywhere with him in prison. Michael > Usage will have declined even further when the commercial company offering > support for reiserfs, Namesys, was liquidated. > >> Are there at least any rough guidelines depending on the distribution? > > Have you tried doing a web search? >
From: The Natural Philosopher on 29 Jul 2010 16:15 Michael Black wrote: > I thought when the Reiser, or whoever, went to prison for killing his > wife, "market share" dropped off. Uncertainty that it would be going > anywhere with him in prison. > I was more worried over rumours that he would kill my hard disk frankly. rumours of brownouts and irrecoverable file system errors..
From: J G Miller on 29 Jul 2010 20:21 On Friday, July 30th, 2010 at 01:36:49h +0200, Aragorn wrote: > reiser4, which works quite differently and offers very high throughput, > but its development has halted for the same reasons as mentioned above. But the development of reiserfs4 has *not* halted. <http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/edward/reiser4/reiser4-for-2.6/> reiser4-for-2.6.34.patch.bz2 26-May-2010 22:29 440K reiser4-for-2.6.34.patch.bz2.sign 26-May-2010 22:29 248 reiser4-for-2.6.34.patch.gz 26-May-2010 22:29 595K reiser4-for-2.6.34.patch.gz.sign 26-May-2010 22:29 248 reiser4-for-2.6.34.patch.sign 26-May-2010 22:29 248
From: Jean-David Beyer on 30 Jul 2010 11:07 Rahul wrote: > 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? > > The database performance is faster using exp2 than exp3. I assume the difference is the cost of doing the journaling. I forget the exact difference, probably a few percent, which is not much, but present. Initial population of the database (not fully loading it) takes several hours and the difference in time consumed is a measurable number of minutes. I have not retested this in a long time (no reason to). My /boot partition is ext2 also, for historical reasons. I do not believe it is necessary anymore. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 11:00:01 up 5 days, 13:52, 3 users, load average: 4.65, 4.80, 4.84
From: notbob on 30 Jul 2010 12:37
On 2010-07-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > I was more worried over rumours that he would kill my hard disk frankly. LOL.... I had one die, but couldn't pin it on him. ;) > rumours of brownouts and irrecoverable file system errors.. More than rumours. I used ReiserFS for a few years. FS errors became a problem. I went back to ext3-4. No problems. Conclusive enough for me. nb |