PDA

View Full Version : Choice of filesystem?


juxtaposed
June 4th, 2007, 09:46 PM
This is another generic "I like this, what do you like?" thread.

Wondering what others choice of filesystem is like, and why; I'm thinking of switching my FAT32 500GB external hard drive to a better filesystem, and i'd like to do it before I get any more stuff on it that would make it harder to use. I'm thinking ext3, but i've heard about others that might be better (like reiserfs or something). Of course, it needs to be windows compatable - there is a program that lets you see/change/write to files on an ext3 file system in linux, though i've heard it can corrupt easily.

So, reading others answers on this semi-poll will help me decide.

Currently I use ext3 on linux, and NTFS on windows.
visionaire
June 4th, 2007, 09:55 PM
i have used reiserfs and is damn fast!
Mazza558
June 4th, 2007, 09:58 PM
I use Ext3 on linux, Ext3 as a shared partition between XP and Linux (with all windows games/apps installed here), and a 10 GB partition for Windows (NFTS)
juxtaposed
June 4th, 2007, 10:14 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS

This looks interesting, as it is said to have good performance.

I'm also thinking of encrpyting my filesystem; unless it leads to big problems (like speed or compatability).
jclmusic
June 4th, 2007, 10:18 PM
i use ext3, and fat32 on my second hard drive because it needs to windows readable - i swap it around a lot.
a12ctic
June 4th, 2007, 10:26 PM
I use XFS most of the time, its a lot faster than ext3.
speedygeo
June 4th, 2007, 10:26 PM
I use FAT 32 on winxp partition, but I primarily use Kubuntu on a reiserfs. The /home partition is on a reiserfs too. I had problem with ext3 when I access it from win, so I don't access anymore. I access the FAT32 easily from linux.
mips
June 4th, 2007, 10:57 PM
Mostly XFS but would love to give ZFS a spin.
juxtaposed
June 5th, 2007, 12:04 AM
I use XFS most of the time, its a lot faster than ext3.


Mostly XFS but would love to give ZFS a spin.

XFS sounds good, I should consider trying it.

How easy is it to access it from windows? Is it possible to encrypt it without a total loss of performance?
ynnhoj
June 5th, 2007, 12:07 AM
i stuck with ext3 for quite a while, but made the switch to reiser the last time i re-installed (~3 months ago). i didn't think xfs would be mentioned so many times -- i guess i'll read up on it to figure out why :)
yatt
June 5th, 2007, 04:58 AM
XFS sounds good, I should consider trying it.

How easy is it to access it from windows? Is it possible to encrypt it without a total loss of performance?

I use it too, and as far as I know, there isn't a Windows driver for it.
a12ctic
June 5th, 2007, 05:47 AM
XFS sounds good, I should consider trying it.

How easy is it to access it from windows? Is it possible to encrypt it without a total loss of performance?

duno havnt used windows sense 2001 on my desktop.
LightB
June 5th, 2007, 05:50 AM
I use JFS. It's supposed to use less resources when writing large files.
the_darkside_986
June 5th, 2007, 07:18 AM
I use ext3 since I'm not sure what else I should use on Ubuntu. In openSUSE, it installed reiserfs by default but I can't tell the difference in speed on my system. I also use UFS on my FreeBSD partition because it is the default choice when installing. I have no Windows compatible file systems except a Fat32 on a portable usb drive and psp memory card.
runningwithscissors
June 5th, 2007, 09:03 AM
I use JFS for my home partition and ext3 for everything else (boot/root/usr/var/portage tree).

Never had any problems with any of them.

I had used ReiserFS (back when it was still maintained) on a few image files. And some of my files in it were corrupted due to sudden power loss while the image was mounted.
frodon
June 5th, 2007, 09:04 AM
ext3 by default (80% of my total disk space), fat32 for my game partition and my external usb disk
steeleyuk
June 5th, 2007, 09:29 AM
EXT3 on both hard drives. Never causes any problems for me...
mips
June 5th, 2007, 10:03 AM
How easy is it to access it from windows? Is it possible to encrypt it without a total loss of performance?

I'm not aware of windows being able to access XFS partitions at all but maybe have a look at this:
http://www.crossmeta.com/crossmeta.html
http://www.soft32.com/download_190903.html


Never tried encrypting a XFS partition so I honestly cannot say.
speedygeo
June 10th, 2007, 02:42 AM
ZFS is presented like the best fs. Exist a way to use it in Kubuntu/Ubuntu?
angryhomer17
June 10th, 2007, 03:21 AM
ext3. Used that ever since I switched to linux. No probs with it. Stable. I see xfs being mentioned a lot. How's that work out? I have an 300 gig external hdd with a lot of flac files (some mp3 :( ) When I build my new system I think I'm going to transfer all my music to a 500 gigs sata drive. Perhaps xfs is a better choice the ext3 for flac files?
zenwhen
June 10th, 2007, 04:04 AM
EXT3 for my /home partition where my important files go, and Reiser 3 for my root partition, since my actual install can be easily replaced, and Reiser is faster.
NeoLithium
June 10th, 2007, 04:09 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS

This looks interesting, as it is said to have good performance.

I'm also thinking of encrpyting my filesystem; unless it leads to big problems (like speed or compatability).

It does give good performance, I have my /home and my /data partitions as XFS. :) No complaints in the least :) The root filesystem is still ext3 though
insane_alien
June 11th, 2007, 11:12 PM
yeah but with XFS if it borks it borks all the way. you don't get your data back.
thisllub
June 11th, 2007, 11:27 PM
I have a Reiser home partition that has made it through over 2 years and more than a dozen distros but the future looks bleak for Reiser as Hans Reiser has been charged with his wife's murder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Reiser
juxtaposed
June 11th, 2007, 11:42 PM
I just installed ubuntu (had debian before, wanted to go back to ubuntu) and I used XFS (with a 512MB /boot as ext3) and it seems to run great.
SunnyRabbiera
June 11th, 2007, 11:43 PM
ext3 as its the usual default for linux, if others are available I dont bother with them
Adamant1988
June 11th, 2007, 11:49 PM
I use XFS on my desktop because I run virtual machines. XFS can read and move HUGE files VERY quickly, giving me added performance when reading from a VMware file, etc. Which is just plain important to me.

I would really like to see what ZFS can do for me, but I don't suspect I'll see that until I get my macbook or macbook pro next year once I get stationed.
Al Fairclough
June 12th, 2007, 12:02 AM
I have a Reiser home partition that has made it through over 2 years and more than a dozen distros but the future looks bleak for Reiser as Hans Reiser has been charged with his wife's murder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Reiser

Yup, that Reiser will kill ya. ;)
thechris
June 12th, 2007, 04:39 AM
I normally use XFS, but for ubuntu i get blocked by the installer. It always tells me that I MUST put / /usr /boot on ext2/3. This makes no sense as XFS works on all of these. In anycase, maybe its an issue with the installer for AMD64. I've had this issue back with ubuntu6 as well and solved it by simply moving the install to a different partition that had the correct FS on it.
roachk71
June 12th, 2007, 04:55 AM
XFS all the way:

On this computer, I have a 50 GB NTFS partition for XP (need that for my emulators) and the rest as XFS for my Ubuntu partition (save the 1.5 GB or so for the swap.)

XFS is fast & efficient and, if you're careful enough, it shouldn't crash terribly.

Oh, and I know hot to do this, but I wonder whether or not anybody has written a howto for reprofiling the system boot using LILO yet, since I'd like to share this... :KS