View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
leonchik1976 Guru
Joined: 24 Jan 2010 Posts: 325
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:22 pm Post subject: what filesystem do you use? and why? |
|
|
ext3? ext4? xfs? something else? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Doctor Moderator
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 Posts: 2678
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I use ext4 and FAT32. I use ext4 because it is widely used and very stable. I use FAT32 because that is what EFI bootloader requires.
I don't use ext3 because it has been enhanced into ext4 so it really just amounts to having less features and fewer eyes looking for problems. ext2 is good for /boot since it doesn't need a journal. Most other file systems have some reliability/support issues or are just slower. _________________ First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DONAHUE Watchman
Joined: 09 Dec 2006 Posts: 7651 Location: Goose Creek SC
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
reiserfs - rock solid, nobody is "fixing" or "improving" it; fat32 - UEFI; NTFS - occasionally boot windows _________________ Defund the FCC. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ant P. Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009 Posts: 6920
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ext4 when I need a boring system, btrfs when I want to make things "interesting", UDF for interacting with dumb OSes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fturco Veteran
Joined: 08 Dec 2010 Posts: 1181 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm happy with Ext4. At the moment I don't feel the need to try anything else. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mrbassie l33t
Joined: 31 May 2013 Posts: 771 Location: over here
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
zfs, wanted to try out the snapshotting feature. It's very cool. lz4 compression saves me some space without noticable latency.
/boot on ext2
Last edited by mrbassie on Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:15 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Roman_Gruber Advocate
Joined: 03 Oct 2006 Posts: 3846 Location: Austro Bavaria
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I used to use xfs but switched over to ext4 again.
Well personally i use an lvm container which contains a luks volume which utilize ext4. My boot is ext2 which is basically ext3/4 without journal. ext4 is kinda mature now but it had it issues in the early days.
I highly recommend using lvm because it has some hidden features as moving volumes and other cool stuff which I already did. So i just moved my current lvm container from my old harddrive to my new ones. So my installation is 4 years old ... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jonathan183 Guru
Joined: 13 Dec 2011 Posts: 318
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Doctor wrote: | I use ext4 and FAT32. I use ext4 because it is widely used and very stable. I use FAT32 because that is what EFI bootloader requires.
I don't use ext3 because it has been enhanced into ext4 so it really just amounts to having less features and fewer eyes looking for problems. ext2 is good for /boot since it doesn't need a journal. Most other file systems have some reliability/support issues or are just slower. |
ext4 on root usr and data partitions (reasons similar to The Doctor), reiserfs on var for small files performance. Might be tempted to try btrfs for the next install or next time I need to shuffle things about |
|
Back to top |
|
|
krinn Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ext3, but i'm trying ext4 on some non vital datas (the fsck timing is impressive compare to ext3, but i'm not yet ready to switch, waiting a few more).
ext3 prove many times an impressive robustness to power failure and other unexpected events and stability, and a good value at recovering from errors. ext4 has not yet prove that to me. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vaxbrat l33t
Joined: 05 Oct 2005 Posts: 731 Location: DC Burbs
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 12:37 am Post subject: my mix |
|
|
ext4 for /boot (using grub2 here) and for some system roots still.
btrfs for a number of system roots now and have been happy with it
btrfs for all raid arrays. The older are still raid1 based because I've been running them now since before the raid5 support got added (about 2 years?)
and now....
ceph (firefly release) on top of btrfs raids for a >50tb distributed object store. The raid arrays above are still in the process of being loaded into ceph but they will eventually be dedicated to just supporting it. I'll also eventually turn off their samba and nfs shares everywhere except at a couple of gateways. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ct85711 Veteran
Joined: 27 Sep 2005 Posts: 1791
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm mostly using right now ext2/3 (ext2 for boot) ext3 for everything else (of course fat32 for uefi), then I have ntfs for dealing with windows. I have used ext4 before for a while on a different systems. I may switch this system over to ext4 when ever I get bored enough. I've looked into lvm several times, but just don't see much benefit from using it. Considering I don't use any raid setups. From what I've seen, coping partitions from 1 drive to another is a moot point for me; as just coping everything over preserving permissions and stuff works perfectly fine (tested that out on the system I am using right now, and have yet to see an issue). I only had to remember to correct the fstab to the new system (My kernels typically are pretty flexible in that I can transfer then to another system and not have to recompile).
*Update* Switched my root system and my /home partion to ext4 without any issue. Looked into LVM some more, and it seems if I want to even play with lvm, I have to have a initramfs. Personaly, I don't see any reason to have a initramfs only for lvm (my kernel has all the necessary modules builtin in) or only have lvm for my /home partition. Considering my drive that has my rootfs is old, and I expect that to die in the next year or 2; it would have been nice to quickly restore that. However, it seems I will just do it like I've done it all the other years.
Last edited by ct85711 on Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gankfest l33t
Joined: 01 Aug 2007 Posts: 946 Location: Miami Beach, FL
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
ext2/3.. Why fix what isn't broken?
Linux Owns. _________________ Gankfest™ (>")> ~*
Everyone has to start somewhere, it depends on where you end up that counts! (>")> |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cyker Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 Posts: 1746
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am using btrfs in an 8 terabyte RAID5 array and no backups because I am a moron with a tragic and terminal disregard for data stability and safety! \:O/
(halp me) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nlsa8z6zoz7lyih3ap Guru
Joined: 25 Sep 2007 Posts: 388 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ext2 on boot and ext4 on everything else. I used to use xfs on one partition with big files and was quite happy with it.
However I find that ext4 also performs quite well and it has the added advantage that sys-fs/ext4magic sys-fs/extundelete can be used with it.
(If used promptly and properly these really do allow the recovery of almost all files lost due to a careless directory deletion.)
Warning I do not use systemd to handle my mounts. Adding anything like noauto,x-systemd.automount,ext4 to /etc/fstab has caused no end of grief for me.
In particular my backupscripts (which use afio) almost always failed when I did use those options. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Budoka l33t
Joined: 03 Jun 2012 Posts: 777 Location: Tokyo, Japan
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Luks on LVM. ext2 for /boot everything else ext4. One small NTFS partition for a Windows boot that I can't get rid of yet for work reasons. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dr Croubie Apprentice
Joined: 21 Nov 2006 Posts: 159
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
ext2 on /boot, because, well, it's /boot and you don't need anything better (although I've put in the kernel module for ext4 to cover ext2 and ext3 and I don't use ext3 or ext4, so maybe I'll downgrade the kernel to ext2 one day for no reason).
Way back when I first started meddling with penguins, ext2 was pretty much all there was.
About 10 years ago (when I started on gentoo) I started with ReiserFS on / and /home (I've always got 2 discs when I can, a small /boot with / and a large /home). I'm not a big of the handbook saying Reiser 'seems to be less maintained', but it balances well with the developers saying Reiser is perfect and doesn't need any fixes ever again. Somewhere in between those two lies the truth.
When I started backing up semi-religiously, with three external 1TB HDDs (/home is also 1TB), I put ReiserFS on two of them and JFS on the other, after hearing that JFS is better with large files and Reiser is better with lots of small files. I've got lots of photos 5-100MB each (I'm a photographer) so I thought JFS might be better for that. But I haven't noticed any performance difference because all I do with those drives is rsync them occasionally (then leave one at my mum's house in case mine burns down, she gives one of her backup discs to me for the same reason). In case of a weird virus or bad update corrupting one type of filesystem, at least I've got the other.
Just re-installing again now on a fresh SSD, for no reason I've put / as JFS instead of ReiserFS for a change. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mayak n00b
Joined: 16 Jul 2013 Posts: 26
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I use 'Ext4' on almost all partitions since it never let me down.
And there are no plans to switch to another file system actually.
The NFS servers are the only exception. There we use 'XFS' as file system since we got better performance.
Another file system I use is 'OCFS2' - which is totally awesome (I know it sounds bizarre but I actually like this Oracle software). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008 Posts: 6095 Location: Dallas area
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Been using reiser (3) on all my partitions (except boot) for a long time, never any problems even with the (few) sudden shutdowns I've encountered.
Looking at getting a ssd for root and home so I'm looking at btrfs (reiser3 doesn't do discard/trim) for those partitions.
Edit to add: Got in the ssd yesterday and swapped over / to btrfs, works well. Nice speed up on boot time (still using openrc) _________________ PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland
Last edited by Anon-E-moose on Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:31 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Yamakuzure Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 Posts: 2280 Location: Adendorf, Germany
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
zfs and tmpfs. It's all I need. _________________ Important German:- "Aha" - German reaction to pretend that you are really interested while giving no f*ck.
- "Tja" - German reaction to the apocalypse, nuclear war, an alien invasion or no bread in the house.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
depontius Advocate
Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 3509
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
ext2 on /boot
xfs for MythTV storage
Generally ext4 for everything else
That said, I'm starting to experiment with btrfs for my nfs server. I'm using subvolumes to separate mount points, and want to build a (offsite with portable drives) backup strategy with snapshots. _________________ .sigs waste space and bandwidth |
|
Back to top |
|
|
szatox Advocate
Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Posts: 3103
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ReiserFS for "murders your wife" feature. https://encyclopediadramatica.es/Hans_Reiser (Sorry, there used to be better filesystem comparision on wikipedia, but it was removed as a vandalism)
Just kidding. Ext2 on /boot and ext3 on the rest. Old, well tested, well supported, and the only extra thing I sometimes wish it had is file consistency check (hash), but then I come to conclusion fighting bit rot is underlaing devices' job, so what's the problem. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RazielFMX l33t
Joined: 23 Apr 2005 Posts: 835 Location: NY, USA
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2014 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I use fat32, ext4, and jfs.
fat32:
I hate this file system, but my EFI setup requires it. I constantly get fsck failures on the system utilities partition no matter what I do. I've stopped caring. I use this for /boot/efi and the system utilities partition.
ext4:
I use this because it plays nice with rEFInd and because its performance is acceptable. I use this for rootfs and /boot.
jfs:
Extremely low CPU overhead, fast fsck, and in my experience good recovery. I use this for /var, /home, and /tmp. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stephan-t Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 May 2014 Posts: 122
|
Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 7:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
ext2 for boot, ext4 for partition, and xfs for recently data like music or something. For external storage for router and media player use ext3.
jfs also good for data, maybe replace the xfs parition. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
eccerr0r Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2004 Posts: 9645 Location: almost Mile High in the USA
|
Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ext4fs - for SSDs (TRIM)
Ext3fs - for most mechanical HDDs if I didn't migrate to ext4fs
Ext2fs - for low ram systems and sometimes boot for Linux-only systems.
XFS - experimental filesystems, may use it more for media volumes.
Fat16/Fat32 - for transferring between M$ OS and for boot/EFI partitions.
I used to use Reiserfs because it saves a lot of space on the portage tree (and reduces number of needed seeks with a HDD to read it) but after disks have gotten so large and concerns about support loss over time, I switched to ext3/ext4. _________________ Intel Core i7 2700K/Radeon R7 250/24GB DDR3/256GB SSD
What am I supposed watching? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ycUygB1 Apprentice
Joined: 27 Jul 2005 Posts: 276 Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Don't use btrfs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|