FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-03-2010, 11:55 AM
Keith Roberts
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
Centos.

I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
safe' than ext3.

I had a 100GiB ext3 partition, and it took up 1.75GiB for FS
administration purposes. I reformatted it to XFS, and it
only used 50.8MB!

I now have a fresh new drive to install my root Centos
system onto, and wondered about creating the partitions
as XFS?

What about the XFS admin tools - do these get installed when
you format a partition as XFS from anaconda, or are they a
seperate rpm package, installed later?

Kind Regards,

Keith Roberts

--
In theory, theory and practice are the same;
in practice they are not.

This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 12:20 PM
Peter Kjellstr÷m
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

On Friday 03 December 2010 13:55:28 Keith Roberts wrote:
> There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
> Centos.
>
> I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
> safe' than ext3.

'data safe' is certainly not something easy to define. Short answer: no XFS is
not better than ext3 here. Longer answer: Both are journaled, ext3 typically
pushes data to disk quicker, neither are check-summed, ext3 is more widely
used, neither does replication, XFS has some corner cases (I have seen
strangeness with very full filesystems and also it's not recommended for 32-
bit CentOS).

In the end the only thing that'll keep your data safe are backups.

> I had a 100GiB ext3 partition, and it took up 1.75GiB for FS
> administration purposes. I reformatted it to XFS, and it
> only used 50.8MB!

Oversimplified: XFS sets data structures up as you go, ext3 does it from
start. Also, the default for ext3 is to reserve space (see the -m option).

> I now have a fresh new drive to install my root Centos
> system onto, and wondered about creating the partitions
> as XFS?

ext3 is default => extremely well tested => good choice (IMHO)

> What about the XFS admin tools - do these get installed when
> you format a partition as XFS from anaconda, or are they a
> seperate rpm package, installed later?

They are in a separate rpm (xfsprogs, repository: extras).

/Peter
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 12:27 PM
Rainer Traut
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

Am 03.12.2010 13:55, schrieb Keith Roberts:
> There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
> Centos.
>
> I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
> safe' than ext3.
>
> I had a 100GiB ext3 partition, and it took up 1.75GiB for FS
> administration purposes. I reformatted it to XFS, and it
> only used 50.8MB!

Just yesterday we had the case of hitting ext3 limits - a folder can
only contain 32k subfolders. So I had to create a XFS container, to hold
the amount of data.

Rainer
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 12:31 PM
Adam Tauno Williams
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 14:20 +0100, Peter Kjellstr÷m wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2010 13:55:28 Keith Roberts wrote:
> > There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
> > Centos.
> > I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
> > safe' than ext3.
> 'data safe' is certainly not something easy to define.

+1

> Short answer: no XFS is not better than ext3 here.

+1 We'll all move to ext4 with CentOS 6. ext4 is a big improvement
over the options available in CentOS 5

> In the end the only thing that'll keep your data safe are backups.
> > I had a 100GiB ext3 partition, and it took up 1.75GiB for FS
> > administration purposes. I reformatted it to XFS, and it
> > only used 50.8MB!
> Oversimplified: XFS sets data structures up as you go, ext3 does it from
> start. Also, the default for ext3 is to reserve space (see the -m option).

+1

Although equivalent issues can arise in XFS [vs. ext3].
<http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2010/09/xfs-inodes.html>

> > I now have a fresh new drive to install my root Centos
> > system onto, and wondered about creating the partitions
> > as XFS?
> ext3 is default => extremely well tested => good choice (IMHO)

I'd stick with ext3 unless you have a compelling reason to use another
FS.

> > What about the XFS admin tools - do these get installed when
> > you format a partition as XFS from anaconda, or are they a
> > seperate rpm package, installed later?
> They are in a separate rpm (xfsprogs, repository: extras).


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 01:25 PM
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 08:31:12AM -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 14:20 +0100, Peter Kjellstr÷m wrote:
> > On Friday 03 December 2010 13:55:28 Keith Roberts wrote:
> > > There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
> > > Centos.
> > > I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
> > > safe' than ext3.
> > 'data safe' is certainly not something easy to define.
>
> +1
>
> > Short answer: no XFS is not better than ext3 here.
>
> +1 We'll all move to ext4 with CentOS 6. ext4 is a big improvement
> over the options available in CentOS 5
>
> > In the end the only thing that'll keep your data safe are backups.
> > > I had a 100GiB ext3 partition, and it took up 1.75GiB for FS
> > > administration purposes. I reformatted it to XFS, and it
> > > only used 50.8MB!
> > Oversimplified: XFS sets data structures up as you go, ext3 does it from
> > start. Also, the default for ext3 is to reserve space (see the -m option).
>
> +1
>
> Although equivalent issues can arise in XFS [vs. ext3].
> <http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2010/09/xfs-inodes.html>
>
> > > I now have a fresh new drive to install my root Centos
> > > system onto, and wondered about creating the partitions
> > > as XFS?
> > ext3 is default => extremely well tested => good choice (IMHO)
>
> I'd stick with ext3 unless you have a compelling reason to use another
> FS.
>
> > > What about the XFS admin tools - do these get installed when
> > > you format a partition as XFS from anaconda, or are they a
> > > seperate rpm package, installed later?
> > They are in a separate rpm (xfsprogs, repository: extras).

Has anyone an update or status for issues raised in
http://lwn.net/Articles/322823/
or T'so's response to the issue
https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/317781/comments/45
have all the apps been adjusted, or is ext4 still more vulnerable
to data loss than ext3? Could link to a reference?

--
Charles Polisher

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 04:25 PM
Akemi Yagi
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

2010/12/3 Peter Kjellstr÷m <cap@nsc.liu.se>:

>> What about the XFS admin tools - do these get installed when
>> you format a partition as XFS from anaconda, or are they a
>> seperate rpm package, installed later?
>
> They are in a separate rpm (xfsprogs, repository: extras).

There is a good chance that they are included in the distro as of
CentOS 6 [1] and, therefore, are available during the installation.
This remains to be seen/tested though.

Akemi

[1] http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4649
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 05:11 PM
Ross Walker
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

On Dec 3, 2010, at 9:25 AM, cpolish@surewest.net wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 08:31:12AM -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 14:20 +0100, Peter Kjellstr÷m wrote:
>>> On Friday 03 December 2010 13:55:28 Keith Roberts wrote:
>>>> There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
>>>> Centos.
>>>> I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
>>>> safe' than ext3.
>>> 'data safe' is certainly not something easy to define.
>>
>> +1
>>
>>> Short answer: no XFS is not better than ext3 here.
>>
>> +1 We'll all move to ext4 with CentOS 6. ext4 is a big improvement
>> over the options available in CentOS 5
>>
>>> In the end the only thing that'll keep your data safe are backups.
>>>> I had a 100GiB ext3 partition, and it took up 1.75GiB for FS
>>>> administration purposes. I reformatted it to XFS, and it
>>>> only used 50.8MB!
>>> Oversimplified: XFS sets data structures up as you go, ext3 does it from
>>> start. Also, the default for ext3 is to reserve space (see the -m option).
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Although equivalent issues can arise in XFS [vs. ext3].
>> <http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2010/09/xfs-inodes.html>
>>
>>>> I now have a fresh new drive to install my root Centos
>>>> system onto, and wondered about creating the partitions
>>>> as XFS?
>>> ext3 is default => extremely well tested => good choice (IMHO)
>>
>> I'd stick with ext3 unless you have a compelling reason to use another
>> FS.
>>
>>>> What about the XFS admin tools - do these get installed when
>>>> you format a partition as XFS from anaconda, or are they a
>>>> seperate rpm package, installed later?
>>> They are in a separate rpm (xfsprogs, repository: extras).
>
> Has anyone an update or status for issues raised in
> http://lwn.net/Articles/322823/
> or T'so's response to the issue
> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/317781/comments/45
> have all the apps been adjusted, or is ext4 still more vulnerable
> to data loss than ext3? Could link to a reference?

Both ext4 and xfs are susceptible to this type of data loss.

These file systems excel in handling very large volumes of data, TBs, especially in the time to fsck and handling of very large files because of that they tend to be on server class hardware with UPS power protection, or on video recorders where a little data loss isn't the end of the world.

If you are talking GBs of data, stick with ext3.

-Ross

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 05:42 PM
Matty
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Keith Roberts <keith@karsites.net> wrote:
> There was a similar thread about which is the best FS for
> Centos.
>
> I'm using ext3, and wondered if XFS would be more 'data
> safe' than ext3.

If your work load doesn't dictate the use of XFS, I would personally
stick with EXT3. It's the default file system on thousands and
thousands of machines, so I would be willing to bet that the
widespread deployment of EXT3 would flush out show stopping bugs
rather quickly. There was a thread discussing this on the LKML a while
back. You might try searching there to get feedback from the folks who
actually write the file systems.

- Ryan
--
http://prefetch.net
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 07:08 PM
John Jasen
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

>From personal experience, the last three times I ran XFS on large
volumes (4+ TB), they all became irrecoverably corrupted in some way or
another.

The final occasion resulted in XFS being permanently banned from that
establishment.

--
-- John E. Jasen (jjasen@realityfailure.org)
-- "Deserve Victory." -- Terry Goodkind, Naked Empire
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-03-2010, 07:13 PM
Keith Roberts
 
Default XFS or EXT3 ?

Thanks to everyone that answered, for all the replies to my
questions about XFS.

I've taken note of the points raised, and gone with ext3 for
now (again).

I do have a backup strategy in place, and you can use my PHP
script from here, if you like it:

http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=248436

Having made regular backups to the hard drive, I then as I
feel is appropriate, make CD/DVD backups from the backup
drive.

I've lost hard drives and data in the past, so now I take
precautions not to loose any data I need.

Kind Regards,

Keith Roberts

--
In theory, theory and practice are the same;
in practice they are not.

This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:24 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ę2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org