> -----Original Message----- > From: Ajay Shekhawat [mailto:ajay@cedar.Buffalo.EDU] > Sent: 8 December, 2003 11:26 > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com > Subject: Re: EXT3 vs Reiserfs > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:25:47AM +0100, Markus Schiltknecht wrote: > > why is that? thought reiser was faster than ext3 while ext3 would be > > considered more stable (in general). > > Reiser has this "tail packing" option, as well as some other optimizations > that benefit sites with lots of small files (best example: Usenet feeds). > However, this can come at a price for really LARGE files (as a DB would > need). > > > Before getting ways off topic: where can I find a good comparison / > > discussion on different filesystems? > > Checkout > http://oregonstate.edu/~kveton/fs/ > > Since noone has mentioned XFS, let me throw in my recommendation for XFS. > XFS (like, probably, IBM's JFS) is a top-notch filesystem. > Try it out in your scenario, you might like it. I'm currently testing XFS. It seems to be better than reiserfs, because it supports ACLs and online resizing (I applied all patches with success). But is XFS supports shrink? With reiserfs it possible to shrink a filesystem, but this function doesn't seems to be available with XFS. Thanks Yanick _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@sistina.com http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
