Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Which Partition Types Are Superior?

Posted by Hemos on from the good-question dept.

digitalmonkey2k1 writes: "I am currently planning on running an Apache web server and a small ftp on my pc. There are so many file systems that Linux can support now that I'm not certain what ones should be used for certain features. If anyone knows of a comparison list between them, somthing to give a pro/con method of deciding the best sort of configuration It would be greatly appreciated."

7 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. Partition != File System by lkaos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Therefore partition type is quite different from what file system to use.

    Besides, wasn't there just a story on Linux Advanced File Systems????

    There is no reason why use shouldn't use ReiserFS. Performs just as well (for the most part) as ext2 and will improve uptime by eliminating nasty fscks in the event of a failure.

    The more interesting question probably is what kernel should you be using????

    Kudos to story posters for having so many dups today. Really keeping us on our toes huh?

    --
    int func(int a);
    func((b += 3, b));
  2. Short answer: by Matt2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful


    If you're looking to set up a small Apache and FTP for your friends, the short answer is probably: WHO CARES.

    Ext2 will be more than sufficient, and if you feel like it just download the latest Redhat (7.2) and get Ext3 default for free. It probably won't make much difference to you for this task unless you're in an area powered by thousands of gerbils on wheels who happen to get tired at the same time.

    --

    1. Re:Short answer: by Knuckles · · Score: 2, Insightful
      if you install RH7.2 and use the default ext3 filesystem, you need to make sure that your future kernels all have ext3 patched in

      If you install a vanilla kernel, the machine will not be able to mount the root filesystem when you reboot (since it doesn't know anything about ext3 filesystems).

      ext3 filesystems can be mounted by ext2 kernels as long as the fs was cleanly unmounted. (Doesn't help you after a crash, though, there you're right) That's the nice thing aout ext3. That and conversion to ext3 on the fly. And that it claims to be as fast or faster than ext2

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
  3. File system is half the disk story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't address your question directly, but don't forget that things like block size can have just as large an effect on file system performance as the vhoice of FS itself.

  4. NO, NO, NO! by ajuda · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Your question is like a lot of the following:

    Which is the best car?

    Who is the best actor?

    Where is the best place to live?

    None of these questions can be answered without saying "It depends" and neither can yours. Very rarely is anything better than everything else is every single way.

    1. Re:NO, NO, NO! by IpalindromeI · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Very rarely is anything better than everything else is every single way.

      Watermelon is better than every other fruit in every single way.

      --

      --
      Promoting critical thinking since 1994.
  5. ext3 by SnapperHead · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I am running ext3 on all of my machines for a few good reasons. I have ran ReiserFS in the past, but I have switched.
    • ext3 feels more responsive then ReiserFS. This isn't a real benchmark.
    • ext3 supports file attributes. Which is *VERY* important to me. I am kinda pissed off that the most important (well, one of) file attribute is s, this way, if a file is deleted, its contents are zeroed out on the platter. Good for security waykos like me :)
      chattr +a /home/*/.bash_history is a very nice feature.
    • You can mount an ext3 drive on a ext2 system. Theres no converstions that will cause data loss. Plus, it was very simple to get up and running with rh 7.2

    Of course, it has 1 big draw back, its not merged with Linus's kernel. That should be happening soon, I hope.

    --
    until (succeed) try { again(); }