Federico Sevilla III wrote:
> I am of personal opinion that because XFS was designed to handle image files
> and other files larger than the small ones ReiserFS was designed for, we will
> see an increase in performance as size increases. For most database and data
> storage applications, this should be a plus.
Maybe reiserfs manages to be faster than XFS for database applications, but not
being faster at large files, but by offering sophisticated transaction support
having database objects at the file-level (one object, one file) than at the
in-file-level (many objects, one file). A filesystem is just a tree-oriented
database. Maybe it is more efficient to have one database (the filesystem) than
having one database (application) layered on top of another database (the
But maybe XFS can provide transactions and small fs objects at the filesystem
> The fact that XFS is much MUCH
> slower than ReiserFS on deletes should not matter as large tree deletions
> should not be a part of normal day-to-day life of a data storage partition.
> I am truly interested to find out about the benchmark results that Mike
> mentioned he would post soon (on the XFS mailing list). I agree that they will
> be interesting. This doesn't make me look down on ReiserFS, though. I am sure
> it has its plusses. Then of course there's the fact that they're obviously
> designed to handle different load and file types.
> For your Squid cache, don't go XFS, but instead go ReiserFS. It will do a
> job there. For your Samba or NFS partition, go XFS and not ReiserFS.
I do not use XFS, currently. Why is XFS better for Samba?
> Aside from
> the fact that ReiserFS is having problems with NFS (and SFS which runs on top
> of NFS),
NFS has problems with ReiserFS (NFS has design bugs which do not seem to matter
> ReiserFS expects to have EA and ACL support only in ReiserFS v4 (which
> looks exciting, BTW) which is due at least a year from now as per Hans
> For those interested, DARPA supposedly sponsored encryption support to be
> into ReiserFS v4. Still to be seen, of course, but I think we should all be
> happy about this. Like the lead developers of both filesystems
> mentioned "threads ago", XFS and ReiserFS are not competition to each other.
> Instead they both provide what makes Linux a continually more viable platform
> in this world where greed and closed-source applications still take the lead
> a number of ways. (Read: we're not fighting each other, we have a common alien
> enemy). :)
> --> Jijo
> Federico Sevilla III :: jijo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Network Administrator :: The Leather Collection, Inc.