Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 03:21:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 03:21:47 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:28864 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 03:21:46 -0500 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: FileSystem XFS vs RiserFS vs ext3 In-Reply-To: <3E7556C2.7030000@thizgroup.com> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020917 ("Chop Suey!") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.18-xfs (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:32:37 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1143 Lines: 27 In article <3E7556C2.7030000@thizgroup.com> you wrote: > Hi all I get basic understanding of the functions and different between > XFS, RiserFS and ext3. But in high volumn read write enviornment (database, > NFS email server etc), which will provide better preformance? NFS is a bit tricky. Reiser used to be broken on it, and at least from large XFS NFS Servers I know that they tend to be unstable, still. For the Database Servers, I am not sure how well they operate with journaling filesystems. I think Linux Journal had an article on performance on that. Reiser might be your bet, depending on the usage pattern of the filename space, with Ext3 catching up. Personally I love the XFS features for resizing in connection with LVMs, but i guess you can have that with Ext3 and Reiser, too. Greetings Bernd -- eckes privat - http://www.eckes.org/ Project Freefire - http://www.freefire.org/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/