[juneau-lug] Re: Will it spin?

  • From: Jamie <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: juneau-lug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 11:49:59 -0900

Jeremy, Justin, James, & all

Thanks for your suggestions.  I probably should have offered more 
details.  This big disk is to be used in a small work environment where 
the need is to store many, very large, digital images.  ACL's and 
internal security are probably a low priority.  Reliability and speed 
would be of concern.  And compatibility with his image processing 
software (usually Win32, some Mac).

The gist of my original question more to find out if some filesystems 
were more "friendly" (better tested, faster, etc) with very large size 
disks.  Also if there were an known issues of mapping samba on top of a 
very large space.

James - your suggestion of the 3 partitions is intriguing.  I saw some 
benchmarks at the Reiser4 site ( http://www.namesys.com/ ), but wonder 
if they (the tests) are "non-partisan". 

In my mind stability and reliability trumps all.  I wouldn't want to 
take a chance on lots of valuable data.  Leave experimental filesystems 
for the experimenters.

-Jamie

James Zuelow wrote:

>On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 23:39:26 -0900
>"Jeremy C. Hansen" <jeremyh@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Windows is going to look for "Of the file systems currently supported in
>>Linux, XFS uses the most elaborate scheme for storing extended attributes
>>[1]."
>>
>>- Jeremy
>>
>>    
>>
>
>LOL.  I don't want to start a religious war - everyone has their favorite file 
>systems.  :)  IMHO 99.9% of any ACL problems with Samba will result from the 
>Samba/winbind deployment, not the file system.  Also keep in mind that 
>winbind, getfacl and setfacl will be the same binaries regardless of the file 
>system in use, so you may not see the little nuances of the file systems.  
>
>Jamie, if your buddy has time, set up three shares on the same Samba server - 
>ext3, Reiser & XFS and play with them using real users and data.  I've done 
>that at work, and I think the results will be anticlimactic.  
>
>If he is using Samba at home (with only a few users and probably nothing 
>special in regards to detailed security policies on directories & files), I'd 
>suggest that he use whichever file system he's been using in the past, since 
>in my experience there's no real difference in ACL support.
>
>If he's using Samba at work, I'd look at the environment, read the whole 
>document, and make a choice from there.  For example, ext3 extended attributes 
>are limited to 4KB, where Reiser/XFS can have 64KB. (IMHO You'd need a very 
>complex ACL setup to need that).  Remember that the Windows "deny" ACLs aren't 
>well supported.  Also note that the document I linked to is dated April 4 
>2003, almost a year old.  There are newer kernels and the file systems get 
>tweaked on a regular basis.
>
>Cheers,
>
>James
>
>------------------------------------
>This is the Juneau-LUG mailing list.
>To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to juneau-lug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the 
>word unsubscribe in the subject header.
>  
>

-- 
Browns Homepage (pics updated 1Mar2004) http://jdb.homelinux.net


------------------------------------
This is the Juneau-LUG mailing list.
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to juneau-lug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the 
word unsubscribe in the subject header.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. juneau-lug
  3. Archive
  4. 03-2004