(A MUST READ!!!!!) The Ultimately Fastest Ubuntu Desktop/Server You Can Have!

After axely's endorsement of xfs, I decided to try it out on this machine, with a setup similar to what you see near the end of that post. Root and home were switched to xfs, with an ext2 boot partition and standard swap; the system was built from a server installation and without a desktop manager.

Boot and load times were similar to ext3 with dir_index enabled, but lagged by a second or two. I blame that again on the file system load being shifted to the processor, when (as I understand it) ext3 is less cumbersome. :neutral:

Either way, xfs was a far cry from standard ext3, and required far less tweaking to set up than ext3 with dir_index, journal writeback and noatime. Just for fun, I used it on an Xubuntu dual boot on a dual 2.8Ghz Xeon machine with an Ultra SCSI setup. It's alarmingly faster than Dapper's default ext3.

So thanks to axely for pointing this out. Cheers, friends! \\:D/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K.Mandla

Either way, xfs was a far cry from standard ext3, and required far less tweaking to set up than ext3 with dir_index, journal writeback and noatime.

---

Hi,
here a nice thread (on Gentoo forum) about tweaks on XFS. Some of them are suppose to softer the down sides of XFS.

Just for completeness, for those wondering about the mentioned ext3 tweaks, here is another excellent thread on how-to do it.

Maybe some of you find it useful :)

I don't recommend XFS on a laptop unless your power management is rock solid. I have a dodgy battery so accidental shutdowns are common, and in 3 months XFS has twice hosed all my desktop settings (panels, recent documents, Epiphany and LifeRea bookmarks) after an abrupt power down. I'd never previously had a problem with Ext3, although I twice had to use a live CD to rescue file system damage.

My laptop feels (no benchmarks) perceptibly faster with XFS, but my data losses have wasted much more time than XFS has saved me. I imagine it's perfectly reliable for desktop use, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rui Pais

here a nice thread (on Gentoo forum) about tweaks on XFS. Some of them are suppose to softer the down sides of XFS.

Just for completeness, for those wondering about the mentioned ext3 tweaks, here is another excellent thread on how-to do it.

---

Doh! :oops: I should have linked to those things after having mentioned them. :???: Thanks.

No problem, i use both codergeek and jsosic tweaks either on Gentoo as in Ubuntu and it had already cross my mind to mention it... cause i think they are very useful.
I just take your references as an escuse to do it ;)

I'd like to see ZFS. I don't know how the speed is since I've never used it, but I like the features like pool storage (nicer than current RAID implementations), compression, etc.

My HDD are almost fill to the max, so I think its impossible to convert to XFS without other hardware.

I have had good results with both JFS and XFS. Both are faster than reiserfs on the two machines that I run...

desktop 1 = 999mhz with 256 mb ram
desktop 2 = 400mhz with 256 mb ram

the undeserved popularity of reiserfs is something I will never understand.

Anytime bro!

JFS is just as fast as XFS and imho its better at error recovery. Only a week ago my brothers computer (running suse 10.2 on an xfs partition) powered off unexpectedly. When he powered it back up he found that he had lost everything.

One cool thing about XFS is how hard it is to recover a file after its been deleted. (for those tin foil hat users out there)

Oh and I agree with the Bohu, I went from reiserfs to jfs and my boot time decreased by 10 seconds. Not to mention the added responsiveness to my desktop. I want to try reiser4 soon and see how it compares.