> > > 2. Which filesystem seems to be the better ? ext3 ? xfs ? > > reiserfs ? > > We are using xfs. > I tested xfs before going back to reiserfs. I found the performance to > be acceptable aside from quite miserable backup performance once backups > kicked off. (Although reiserfs is now pretty miserable, struggling to > pull 1MB/s off of fibre channel.) How does your experience compare? We used XFS for a very long time, but in the last server upgrade switched to indexed ext3. Not because of any specific problems with XFS but because development & bug-fixing seems/seemed to have flat-lined and I didn't want to get stuck with what was basically an unsupported filesystem on a critical production system. There are advantages to being in the mainstream. :) But I never had any performance problems with XFS, certainly not regarding backup. Throughput was much higher than 1Mb/s [which seems ridiculously slow, I'd suspect something else was in play]. XFS is still my favorite filesystem, with good performance, real tools, and excellent EA support; but I can't justify using it in production anymore. Actually I think XFS is the only filesystem with really enterprise grade tools: with the ability to defrag, freeze, and grow on the fly.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
