| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AutoBot
l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002
Posts: 968
Location: Usually Out
|
 Posted: Sat May 11, 2002 10:02 pm Post subject: Re: I ditched my XFS months ago because of these and similar |
 |
|
| Here's how I got out... wrote: | Issues, issues. XFS sucks...
Anyhow, to get off of it, this is what I did.
I had a second hard drive, so I went:
login: root
password: *********
/root# cd /
# mke2fs -j /dev/hdc1 # make new ext3 partition on second hard drive
# mount /dev/hdc1 /mnt # mount it
# find / -mount -print | cpio -pdm / # fine all files on your current partition and cpio them over.
The cpio part is important because you want to keep your permissions intact.. If you do a regular copy, be sure to use -Rfp flags to keep permissions intact.
Good luck! |
I wouldn't say XFS sucks, but I did change my filesystem to ext3 and all is well now. But you could just as easily use ReiserFS or JFS for that matter, I will say while using XFS my emerge rsync went much faster as it must read small files faster than ext3.
_________________
This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
smckown
n00b
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2002 7:03 pm Post subject: Using XFS |
|
|
If you want to use XFS with the latest gentoo kernel, just turn off preempt in the kernel and recompile. This is what I did. On my Transmeta crusoe sub-notebook I'm not sure the UI is any slower as a result.
For me ext3 is not a good choice. Ext3 looks at its on-disk transaction journal every 5 seconds. This read activity prevents the hard drive from ever spinning down and consuming unnecessary battery power. XFS will allow the drive to spin down if there isn't local I/O. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smckown
n00b
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:50 pm Post subject: CVS XFS will fix preempt_count problem |
|
|
Just noticed on linux-xfs mailling list that XFS in their CVS repository works properly with the preemptible kernel patch and the lockbreak patch. It appears that interactive performance is much better. Check out the messages in this thread by going to http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-xfs&w=2&r=1&s=preempt_count&q=b
I expect a future release of gentoo-sources may include these fixes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
delta407
Bodhisattva
Joined: 23 Apr 2002
Posts: 2876
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:57 pm Post subject: Re: I ditched my XFS months ago because of these and similar |
|
|
| AutoBot wrote: | | I wouldn't say XFS sucks, but I did change my filesystem to ext3 and all is well now. But you could just as easily use ReiserFS or JFS for that matter, I will say while using XFS my emerge rsync went much faster as it must read small files faster than ext3. |
Try using Reiser, and look at your small file performance then. I like my ReiserFS.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AutoBot
l33t
Joined: 22 Apr 2002
Posts: 968
Location: Usually Out
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2002 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: I ditched my XFS months ago because of these and similar |
|
|
| delta407 wrote: | | AutoBot wrote: | | I wouldn't say XFS sucks, but I did change my filesystem to ext3 and all is well now. But you could just as easily use ReiserFS or JFS for that matter, I will say while using XFS my emerge rsync went much faster as it must read small files faster than ext3. |
Try using Reiser, and look at your small file performance then. I like my ReiserFS. |
Your correct, my next install I will give ReiserFS the full run-through and make my final decision on a filesystem for my gentoo workstation.
As it stands for me currently:
ext2: no journaling, no chance
ext3: nope, too slow
XFS: preempt is a must, needs work
ReiserFS: inconclusive
_________________
This message self destructed a long time ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
