User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

XFS: the filesystem of the future?

XFS: the filesystem of the future?

Posted Jan 28, 2012 16:37 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)
In reply to: XFS: the filesystem of the future? by dlang
Parent article: XFS: the filesystem of the future?

The window was *far* smaller. However, the question is not did anyone ever suffer any data loss. It's how many people and how much data in comparison to other filesystems. I know of no other filesystem as resilient at its default settings as was the pre2.6.31 (or so) ext3. I also never noticed any performance problems. Certainly nothing that my customers cared about.

And of course, we can still mount ext3 explicitly data=ordered.

Oh for the days when Linux filesystem devs cared more about reliability than benchmarks... no matter whose fault the data loss might be. Things have changed since the Tweedie days.

Today, I use ext4 with nodelalloc. I tried ext4 at its defaults. But the first time power was lost (and the UPS failed) we had to rebuild a bunch of C/ISAM files. Never in our long history with ext3 did we *ever* have anything like that happen. (And my customers are bad about letting their UPS's go.) Personally, I think nodelalloc should be default, with delalloc available as a mount option.

Current Linux filesystem devs just seem reckless to me.


(Log in to post comments)

XFS: the filesystem of the future?

Posted Jan 29, 2012 0:53 UTC (Sun) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

the current filesystem devs are the same people as they were in the 'good old days'

go talk to a good database admin (or especially a database developer), they will tell you that all filesystems have always had these problems, and they can probably tell you horror stories about ext3 and it's "worst in the industry" fsync performance (it's been documented for a fsync to take 10s of seconds on ext3 vs ms for other filesystems under the same workload)

you can disable all caching by mounting a filesystem with the sync option, but the performance is going to be _so_ horrible (unless you have drives that lie about when the data is safe) that you will end up changing back.

XFS: the filesystem of the future?

Posted Jan 29, 2012 3:09 UTC (Sun) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]

"the current filesystem devs are the same people as they were in the 'good old days'"

No. In the Ext world, I hardly ever hear the name "Stephen Tweedie" anymore. And he's the main developer I trusted. A very careful, conservative, and patient devloper. Took forever to get Ext3 out, Which annoyed me at the time. But I've learned to appreciate his "good things come to those who wait" philosophy. Today, it's Ted T'so at the forefront of Ext. A *very* different person.

"go talk to a good database admin (or especially a database developer), they will tell you that all filesystems have always had these problems"

And there you go again. Casting it as "black and white". If Ext3 ever lost a byte of data on someone's machine in Kenya, then by the gods, it's just as bad as the current crop of linux data sieve filesystems.

Hey, if you can keep doing the black and white thing, I can compensate by adjusting the contrast knob a bit. ;-) Current linux filesystems may not be, exactly, data sieves. But they are a far cry from the halcyon days of Ext3 pre 2.6.31.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds