Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Projected volume size is around 1TB,. Filesystem should perform fast when dealing with LOTS of files in every folder.

Snapshots support would be great, for backup purpose, but not compulsory.

It will be created over a hardware RAID 0+1 system, but I hardly doubt this will be an issue.

share|improve this question
add comment

4 Answers

up vote 5 down vote accepted

While I haven't checked out ext4 yet, I'm using xfs with LVM almost everywhere.

You get the snapshots, you get online partition growing, and instant fsck if you do crash. When my mail spool fills up, I'm happy to know its a 30 seconds procedure to fix - assuming your LVM volume group has some free space in it.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I discourage ReiserFS for panic under heavy load:

REISERFS: panic (device Null superblock): vs-7042: entry_points_to_object: entry must be visible

ReiserFS works quite realiably until it is stressed with many concurrent accesses. You can read about it here.

Just now I have Maildir (around 200GB) on ReiserFS. During last two days FS crashed two times and I'm looking for a way to resolve this problem (seems like using kernel 2.6.25.4 helps). Later I will try to migrate to JFS or XFS.

ReiserFS seems unmaintained and for sure have existing bugs. Its speed does not compensate for its problems. It is not realiable solution.

share|improve this answer
add comment

LVM running ReiserFS - managed a server storing in the region of 20,000,000 quarantined messages and never skipped a beat.

Plus for reasons I never worked out, the LVM on hardware RAID was faster than native file system access.

There is the potential for an issue with flock, non syncronous updates and Reiser but I never actually ran into it in the best part of 3 years.

share|improve this answer
    
Lots of files in every folder? XFS is not so hot with that. Reiser handles that use-case better. XFS is better for mbox style spool directories where large files are constantly added to. Ext4 may be better still, but hasn't been around long enough. –  sysadmin1138 May 29 '09 at 14:35
    
+1 for ReiserFS and its excellent handling of small files. –  Avery Payne Jun 30 '09 at 19:45
    
The performance difference between XFS and Reiser is debatable depending upon who you ask. The more important deal breaker is whether you entrust your data to Reiser. Not I, personally. –  Dan Carley Nov 27 '09 at 12:24
add comment

xfs

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.