Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
New home server build - what FS
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4158
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:26 pm    Post subject: New home server build - what FS Reply with quote

Well my little ITX system is showing its age, esp being PATA and a small 80gig HD (thought that was big at the time ;)
I am looking at buying a new set of hardware with ability to hold 2HDD

I want to RAID the two drives together, but what FS? I would like to eventually use BTRFS, but that isn't possibly for a good few months.
What would be the best way to setup the system (in a month or two) to then easily goto BTRFS?
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
i92guboj
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10024
Location: Córdoba (Spain)

PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:53 pm    Post subject: Re: New home server build - what FS Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
Well my little ITX system is showing its age, esp being PATA and a small 80gig HD (thought that was big at the time ;)
I am looking at buying a new set of hardware with ability to hold 2HDD

I want to RAID the two drives together, but what FS? I would like to eventually use BTRFS, but that isn't possibly for a good few months.
What would be the best way to setup the system (in a month or two) to then easily goto BTRFS?


Probably -yet again :p- ext3/4.

http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Conversion_from_Ext3
_________________
Gentoo Handbook | My website
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4158
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yer thought that.
So should forget about RAID for now (probably not even use 2nd HD) and when BTRFS stabilses then ext3->btrfs and add 2nd drive to the pool.

Or setup a mirrored RAID with ext3, and when BTRFS stabilises convert one of the two drives to btrfs and then get btrfs to add the 2nd drive the pool?
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChojinDSL
l33t
l33t


Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 784

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If this is going to be a home server, e.g. dump all your data on it so you can access it via the network, then you can save yourself a lot of headache in the longrun if you stick to tried and true filesystems, such es ext3 for example.

Just because you can successfully format a partition with new filesystem and copy files onto it, is no guarantee that you wont experience trouble down the road.

And you know how it usually hits you, whenever you least expect it and when your in a tight spot where you need your data NOW.


As long as your FS/HD can saturate your network link, all is good. Unless of course your home server is going to be accessed by a lot of people simultaenously and you intend on running resource heavy databases and mail servers on it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nerdbert
l33t
l33t


Joined: 09 Feb 2003
Posts: 981
Location: Berlin

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
Or setup a mirrored RAID with ext3, and when BTRFS stabilises convert one of the two drives to btrfs and then get btrfs to add the 2nd drive the pool?


Alternatively use one disk right now, if the files on it aren't that important. Buy another 2 later on and create an incomplete RAID5 (consisting of the the new disks). Copy your data over to the RAID5, delete the original disk and add it.

That way you are "just" wasting 33% for redundancy, not 50% :D
_________________
I'm really wondering what Lovechild is doing nowadays...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chris...
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 26 Sep 2006
Posts: 179
Location: Melbourne, AU

PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ChojinDSL wrote:
As long as your FS/HD can saturate your network link, all is good.


same, I have no need for some FS that is 10% faster then some other FS on a certain type of file size or whatever. All FS out perform what I require so any will do for me. What I picked wasnt a result of some numbers in a spread sheet, I picked a FS based on features such as commonality, tools, support and stability

what are you actually using this server for? being a home server unless you have multiple family members and very high speed network any file system will be fine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4158
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

:D been built for a couple of weeks
Home NAS and simple http for stuff

went for Ext4
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 2583

PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2009 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chris... wrote:
ChojinDSL wrote:
As long as your FS/HD can saturate your network link, all is good.


same, I have no need for some FS that is 10% faster then some other FS on a certain type of file size or whatever. All FS out perform what I require so any will do for me. What I picked wasnt a result of some numbers in a spread sheet, I picked a FS based on features such as commonality, tools, support and stability

what are you actually using this server for? being a home server unless you have multiple family members and very high speed network any file system will be fine


With those criteria there's only one answer - ext3. That's what I run on my home servers. I'm trying to get all of my hardware to kernels which run ext4, but plan to wait a bit before moving over. At the moment I'm more interested in getting my MythTV backend media store from xfs to ext4.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Spaulding
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Location: /dev/vagina

PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

imo you should choose xfs :twisted:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neuron
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 28 May 2002
Posts: 2371

PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

keep in mind that ext3 can be bad when it comes to fragmentation, I had a server being written to by 5-6 users at the same time, and fragmentation on each file rose very quickly. Not so with ext4. There are however known data loss issues in ext4 (I dont care on that server, as the data is only temporary, and can easily be recovered, I have ext3 on root).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
i92guboj
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10024
Location: Córdoba (Spain)

PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

neuron wrote:
keep in mind that ext3 can be bad when it comes to fragmentation,


I've never experienced any problem related to that. It's true that it fragments, just like any other fs. But the impact in performance has never been noticeable by me, assuming that you have enough free space, of course.

But even if it was noticeable, it certainly can't be worse than reiserfs :p
_________________
Gentoo Handbook | My website
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neuron
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 28 May 2002
Posts: 2371

PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i92guboj wrote:
neuron wrote:
keep in mind that ext3 can be bad when it comes to fragmentation,


I've never experienced any problem related to that. It's true that it fragments, just like any other fs. But the impact in performance has never been noticeable by me, assuming that you have enough free space, of course.

But even if it was noticeable, it certainly can't be worse than reiserfs :p


I had multiple blocks being written at once by multiple sources and ended up with an iowait of about 45%, switched to ext4 and it's down to 3-5% under similar loads, so yeah, in my situation it mattered loads ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum