| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
goprisko n00b

Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 4 Location: Shenzhen China
|
Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 2:27 pm Post subject: Why I prefer jfs to any other format for partitions |
|
|
Over the years, I have tried various formats for partitions:
Reiser, Ext2,3 linux native, and jfs.
Living on a ship as I do, my system must cope with power outages, and emergency reboots.
Only jfs has proven able to seamlessly recover from these mishaps, without loss of data.
The others failed at one time or other.
I recommend all new installations use jfs for their file system format.
INDY _________________ To go where none have gone . . . .
To see what none have seen . . . . |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
666threesixes666 Apprentice


Joined: 31 May 2011 Posts: 286
|
Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JFS is god like.... do not be fooled about XFS... JFS has the best io speeds, file system checks, and stability out of any of the other file systems i have tested. it is a "tip/trick" to use JFS instead of default ext file systems. JFS is from IBM... _________________ Satan compels thee |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hypnos Advocate


Joined: 18 Jul 2002 Posts: 2760 Location: Omnipresent
|
Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ext4 has done well for me recovering from power outages due to the wonky aftermarket battery I have in my laptop. Its improvements over ext3 include journal checksums and fast fsck (minutes instead of hours).
Ext4 has the advantage over jfs of a much larger userbase, so presumably bugs are found and squashed faster. With respect to performance, here's one set of benchmarks. _________________ Personal overlay | Simple backup scheme |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jaglover Advocate


Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 3980 Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Do not deceive yourself, you cannot have great performance and ability to cope with power outages at the same time. Get a UPS. _________________ Please learn how to denote units correctly! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hypnos Advocate


Joined: 18 Jul 2002 Posts: 2760 Location: Omnipresent
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rorgoroth Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 06 Aug 2012 Posts: 129 Location: England, UK
|
Posted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
No love for Btrfs? Personally I prefer and have been using on my Arch "laptop" for about a year and a half now with no issues.
The snapshots and file compression are really nice. I finally converted my ext4 partitions to it a few days ago and copied back everything to make use of compress=lzo (basic 'general use real time' compression) and have been blown away by the readback difference on this gentoo box, a good example I found straight away was that after running eix-sync, eix-update was called as per usual and instead of taking almost/over 30 seconds to go through nearly 160 dirs it now takes less then 15 seconds - I could not bold that enough if I tried.
Last edited by rorgoroth on Thu May 23, 2013 10:31 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hypnos Advocate


Joined: 18 Jul 2002 Posts: 2760 Location: Omnipresent
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rorgoroth Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 06 Aug 2012 Posts: 129 Location: England, UK
|
Posted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Spinning.
Edit, I just realized a very big mistake, I actually meant to type less then 15 seconds eg, better then 50% better. Let me correct that!
Edit 2, If you are interested, a second read of all that data takes less then 1 second though.
Note to self: Stop posting on too many threads at once. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mv Advocate


Joined: 20 Apr 2005 Posts: 3152
|
Posted: Fri May 24, 2013 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jaglover wrote: | | Do not deceive yourself, you cannot have great performance and ability to cope with power outages at the same time. |
Sure, you can. In theory, this is not an issue at all as has been proved by Reiser4. It is a question how good it is implemented in the filesystem. The journal implementation in ext4 of course means performance loss since it implies duplicate write. I do not know how clever it is implemented btrfs, jfs, xfs, although I can imagine that btrfs does not need duplicate write, either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NeddySeagoon Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003 Posts: 30005 Location: 56N 3W
|
Posted: Fri May 24, 2013 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Journaling does not prevent data loss. It ensures the filesystem is in a self consistent state after the content of the journal has been used to recover the filesystem (to a self consistent state).
This normally means that sometings between a few seconds and a few minutes of user data has been lost.
Get a real UPS that does dual conversions, test the battery at least once a month, do backups and read my signature. _________________ Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jaglover Advocate


Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 3980 Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
Posted: Fri May 24, 2013 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mv wrote: | | Jaglover wrote: | | Do not deceive yourself, you cannot have great performance and ability to cope with power outages at the same time. |
Sure, you can. In theory, this is not an issue at all as has been proved by Reiser4. It is a question how good it is implemented in the filesystem. The journal implementation in ext4 of course means performance loss since it implies duplicate write. I do not know how clever it is implemented btrfs, jfs, xfs, although I can imagine that btrfs does not need duplicate write, either. |
Wow. ReiserFS can do all that. It is clearly above laws of nature then. Too bad I think it is a crappy filesystem and will never use it.  _________________ Please learn how to denote units correctly! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|