Am Mi, den 28.01.2004 schrieb Colin Paul Adams um 12:09:
> >>>>> "W" == WipeOut <wipe_out@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> W> When you boot off the FC1 CD1 type "linux reiserfs".. Thsi will
> W> allow you to install onto reiserfs filesystems..
>
> W> JFS is also availible by running "linux jfs" when booting from
> W> the install CD..
> W> Why are you after reiserfs??
>
> Can anyone tell me the pros and cons of resierfs v. JFS v. ext3?
> --
> Colin Paul Adams
> Preston Lancashire
ext3 is known to be reliable and has the advantage to be mounted as ext2
in very hard error cases. ext3 has not the speed of other journaling
filesystems on partitions with very very much files.
reiserfs is fast but well known to have killed many user partitions.
Especially bad are the reiserfs tools for maintenance issues like fsck
in error cases. The main developer H. Reiser himself sees it's focus
more on speed than on reliability. Think about this by yourself. [I
personally once lost data using a reiserfs partition and never chose it
again.
For the others like jfs or xfs I have no personal experience. I only
tried on a test system xfs and it was fast and offers ACLs (very useful
if you have a samba server in an NT/W2k/WXP environment). Some reported
a performance boost running cyrus-imapd maildir on xfs in contrast to
ext3.
Alexander
--
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG key 1024D/ED695653 1999-07-13
Fedora GNU/Linux Core 1 (Yarrow) on Athlon CPU kernel 2.4.22-1.2149.nptl
Sirendipity 12:41:47 up 3 days, 20:19, load average: 0.10, 0.16, 0.19
[ ÎÎÏÎÎ Ï'ÎÏÏÎÎ - gnothi seauton ]
