JFS vs EXT3 vs XFS vs ReiserFS

[Rolf Kutz]

On 30/04/08 09:11 +0200, O. Sinclair wrote:
>
>> Unless the EXT3 commit algorithm has had some work done on it, EXT3 is a 
>> poor choice for laptops or any other power consumption sensitive device. 
>>  Historically (and maybe still) EXT3 used fixed commit interval, 
>> regardless of what was or wasn't happening.  This meant that your hard 
>> drive was rarely (if ever) going to spin down if not being used; it was 
>> woken up every couple of seconds to do meaningless commits.
>Well I am no hacker but I have used, and am using, ext3 on my laptop(s) 
>since a couple of years and this does NOT happen. The disks nicely "go 
>to sleep" when there is no activity. So I assume this has been fixed one 
>way or the other.
>
>ReiserFS (if I recall what I have read about it correctly) is said to 
>have the problem that if the system crashes (powercut or such) the 
>journals can be corrupt and then they really mean nothing. This is what 
>I suspect happened to the desktops where I used ReiserFS as we have 
>frequent powercuts and users not always by desktop to shutdown before 
>UPS runs out of steam. No such problems with ext3, regardless of other 
>problems.

There's also the problem, that if you store a
reiserfs image inside of a reiserfs partition (for
backup, ...), filesystemcheck can corrupt your
partition.

regards, Rolf
-- 
...about the greatest democrazy in the world.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-users/attachments/20080501/bebf0b10/attachment.sig>