Fedora Users — Re: recommending reiserfs?

Re: recommending reiserfs?

Date Prev

Date Next

Thread Prev

Thread Next

Date Index

Thread Index

To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: Re: recommending reiserfs?

From: neil <neilcuk@xxxxxxx>

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:33:34 +0100

In-reply-to: <[email protected]>

References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

Reply-to: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>

User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1

Florin Andrei wrote:

On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 21:16, Bill Schoolcraft wrote:

In my first experience working with MySQL, we were recommended
to format that particular partition to Reiser for performance
reasons.  That's just my initial experience and I had to setup
four servers so far, will keep you posted...

_In_theory_, for that type of workload (reading/writing fast to/from
large files), probably XFS is best.

But that's just the theory; you have to run benchmarks in your
particular case and see what happens.

I haven't used ReiserFS in production. In practice it's supposed to do intelligent block management to maximise the capacity of your storage. For example - if you specify blocks of 4k and your files end up being 1k or smaller the ReiserFS system will still used the remaining space within each block - very cool indeed! whereas in the extended filesystem you would potentially loose 3/4 of your storage capacity if your file ended up being 1k or less. But read the links that have been posted and make sure you test/test/test :-)

neil.