Reiserfs is performs better than ext3 if you have a large number of
small files, otherwise ext3 performs better than reiserfs.
Both XFS & JFS have not been tested under production.
I suggest you to upgrade your kernel to 2.4.20 incase you installed
woody with 2.2 kernel.
BTW I'm using reiserfs on my workstation.
On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 11:33, Karthik wrote:
Hi,--
I need to have quota enabled in our new NIS server's home directory. I
currently have three options for filesystems : ext3, reiserfs and xfs.
Is ext3 less performing, less mature and slow than the other two? I have
seen
reiserfs perform faster than a similar ext3 filesystem. I have no experience
with xfs. Having quota in ext3 is very easy, but I want to squeeze every bit
of performance from my new server.
With reiserfs, i have to apply a kernel patch to enable quotas. Is there any
easier way to enable reiserfs quotas?( a kernel deb file with reiserfs quotas
enabled??)
How about xfs? has anybody used xfs with / without quotas? how is the
performance? Tried google and I am satisfied with Xfs. But I dont want to
run into problems half way through - like kernel recompilation, patches,
package updates, version conflicts, etc. My system is a plain woody
2.4.18-bf24 kernel with all security updates.
If I have to recompile the kernel for anthing other than ext3 with quotas,
then can I go for a 2.6 series kernel? Will that have xfs/reiserfs quota
support or patches?
Regards,
Karthik
