Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Best File System For Web Hosting?

Posted by timothy on from the use-the-one-with-the-bits dept.

An anonymous reader writes "I'm hoping for a discussion about the best file system for a web hosting server. The server would serve as mail, database, and web hosting. Running CPanel. Likely CentOS. I was thinking that most hosts use ext3 but with of the reading/writing to log files, a constant flow of email in and out, not to mention all of the DB reads/writes, I'm wondering if there is a more effective FS. What do you fine folks think?"

10 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. ReiserFS Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It will kill your innocent files to save some space....

    1. Re:ReiserFS Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I heard it can murder your server's performance.....

    2. Re:ReiserFS Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I heard it only kills the wifi. And then makes it disappear completely.

  2. Re:ZFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    FAT

  3. WinFS by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2, Funny

    It will be released someday

  4. ReiserFS. It kills the competition. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    EOM.

  5. Re:ZFS by sjames · · Score: 5, Funny

    Depending on the type of web content, XXXFS might be appropriate.

  6. Definitely FAT, but which one? by jonadab · · Score: 3, Funny

    There are arguments to be made in favor of FAT16 or even FAT32, but I think I'd go with FAT12, just because it's simpler. You don't need LFNs for web hosting, do you?

    --
    Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  7. Re:reiserfs by rwa2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I hear reiserfs is killer.

    (too soon?)

    Whatever... I really did love reiser3 back in the day, if only because rm -rf on large dirs was blazingly swift compared to ext2

  8. Re:ext3 by Admiral+Llama · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't quite trust ext4 for writes.

    app: Hey, can you write this data out to
    ext4: DONE!
    app: Uhh, that wasn't long enough to actually write the data.
    ext4: Sure it was, I'm super faGRRRRRRRRRRRRRst at writing too.
    app: wait, did you just cache that write and report it written but then not actually write it to disk until 30 seconds later?
    ext4: Yeah, what about it?

    That being said, ext3 and mount it with the noatime flag. If you're on a web server you don't want to be hammering it with writes to update the last access time. That's just silly.