On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--
On 10/12/2016 08:53 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
It was, some years ago. This is no longer the case.
I suggest that users evaluate their options under their own workload. When I ran tests last year on CentOS 7 for rsnapshot storing maildirs (the exact workload in question here), ext4 was significantly faster on the hardware I was using.
There are some other considerations. XFS has a good track record for large numerical calculations, video production, and remote sensing. These
are applications where the data are lost due to downtime recovering from a crash are much larger than the data that was "in flight" when the crash occurred. XFS puts priority on metadata consistency, so filesystems are up and running very quickly after a crash.
There are applications where losing a few bytes of data should "never" happen, even it results in substantial downtime.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
George N. White III <aa056@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Head of St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia
Head of St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia
_______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
