Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: xfs or ext4 etc.?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Beans
    271

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    Two days ago I had firefox and opera open as 12.04 crashed. I couldn't even
    do a fsck in recovery boot but had to go 10.04 for fsck and be able to reboot 12.04.

    FreeBSD uses ZFS? So why the heck can they use it, but not on Linux? It would
    be neat to be able to use zfs on the next ubuntu or so. I mean easy, not as on Sabayon.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Beans
    2,133
    Distro
    Ubuntu 16.04 Xenial Xerus

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    You can use ZFS on linux. It's available via zfsonlinux, but it's not yet considered stable or tuned for performance, but they are actively developing it, and it works fairly well in my own testing.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Beans
    1,941

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    Quote Originally Posted by ahso4271 View Post
    Two days ago I had firefox and opera open as 12.04 crashed. I couldn't even
    do a fsck in recovery boot but had to go 10.04 for fsck and be able to reboot 12.04.

    FreeBSD uses ZFS? So why the heck can they use it, but not on Linux? It would
    be neat to be able to use zfs on the next ubuntu or so. I mean easy, not as on Sabayon.
    Why are you running Firefox or Opera on a server...?

    I find ext4 very stable. It's been running for a couple of years now on my server... No crashes/blips/etc to speak of. Just solid.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Beans
    2,133
    Distro
    Ubuntu 16.04 Xenial Xerus

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    Quote Originally Posted by arrrghhh View Post
    Why are you running Firefox or Opera on a server...?

    I find ext4 very stable. It's been running for a couple of years now on my server... No crashes/blips/etc to speak of. Just solid.
    +1. ext4 is rock solid and I use it on all of my home boxes and servers at work where the filesystem size is < 16TB. The only time I've ever had to fsck one of my boxes was during a work power outage and one of our old UPS's died in about 10 seconds (bad battery) before the generator kicked on.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Beans
    2,232

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    I believe, from all I have read, that xfs is somewhat faster, but ext4 is much more reliable. In my own experience, ext4 has been "rock solid". However, I will disclose that I have never used xfs.

    Tim
    Cyberpower PC, Core i5 2500 3.3 gHz, 8GB DDR3, ATI 6770 1GB, Samsung BX 2440 LED 1080p, 1 TB SATA III, 2 TB SATA III, Siduction Linux 64-bit

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Beans
    26

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    Personally I really Like XFS. I use it on both my main server and My home laptop.

    For my server, the main data partition is in XFS.

    For my laptop, The home partition is in XFS

    In both of these situations, the file-system is being used to store large files and in both systems the computer is protected by a UPC ( or battery) I have never had a problem, even with HARD reboots.

    Even across several HARD HARD reboots and across multiple re-installs I have never had a problem. I always recommend XFS for read intensive, write minimal applications.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Beans
    357

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    ext3 and ext4 are about as solid as file systems get, at least on Linux. If you're experiencing power outages or crashes then you should definitely be using one of these. Of course, the best protection against data loss is regular backups, regardless of what file system you use. Hardware failure will make your file system pretty irrelevant.

    The reason most distributions don't ship with ZFS is because of the license. The Linux kernel's license (GPL) is not compatible with the ZFS license (CDDL). This means ZFS is only available as an add-on. FreeBSD is able to ship with ZFS because they have a less restrictive license.

    I use ZFS on my Ubuntu home server and it has been pretty good. The only issue I had was during an upgrade of ZFS packages, which caused some corruption. ZFS was able to recover and keep working.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    S.H.I.E.L.D. 6-1-6
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    If your looking for reliability, I suggest JFS. It recovers fast, and can take a lot of damage while making sure your files are not corrupted. That is, if you have less memory. If you have enough memory for performance, go with ZFS. They recently fixed the preempt bug, so it is safe to install on linux servers. If you are worried about crashes, install a BBU unit to your drives.

    I use XFS only because it transfers fast, and its on a RAID6 array so not much chance for corruption/crashes. Drives have BBUs installed, along with a UPS and datacenter backup generators.
    Last edited by sandyd; September 16th, 2012 at 02:44 AM.
    Don't waste your energy trying to change opinions ... Do your thing, and don't care if they like it.

  9. #19
    TenPlus1's Avatar
    TenPlus1 is offline Grande Half-n-Half Cinnamon Ubuntu
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Beans
    837
    Distro
    Lubuntu

    Post Re: xfs or ext4 etc.?

    I would recommend purchasing a UPS for your computer so that the power wont go down during an outage and damage your hard-drive at all, as well as any other pieces of equipment you have connected to your system...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •