XFS vs ext3 (it was "Reiserfs vs ext3")

[Nitebirdz]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 01:51:39PM +0300, wildmad wrote:
> >>
> >>After that experience, I immediately reinstalled Ubuntu on my server 
> >>and used XFS. On my desktop I went back to ext3.
> >>
> 
> Hi Jimmie,
> 
> Can you please tell me what is or are the advantages on XFS over ext3 on 
> a server? I am indeed planning to reinstall Ubuntu on my server and 
> would like to understand the pros and cons. I moved from ReserFS to ext3 
> on my workstations for fear of problems like that which faced you.
> 

XFS was written by the folks at Silicon Graphics (SGI) to fit their own 
customer's needs.  In other words, it's especially optimized for
multimedia environments where one can come across of pretty large
filesystems and files.  So, if you deal with large filesizes there is a
good chance XFS will get you the most bang for the buck.  Now, when I
see benchmarks out there comparing its performance against ext3 for
small files or directories with lots of small files, it tends to lag
behind.  When it comes to stability, it's quite, and I'd say its
administration tools ('xfsrepair', 'xfsdump', 'xfsrestore', etc.) are
simply superb, although performing backups of complete filesystems is
not so difficult these days.  

If you google it, you should find a few benchmarks out there to give you
a good idea how they compare.

----------------
Nitebirdz
http://www.sacredchaos.com/