Sponsored Content
Full Discussion: Gfs2 vs xfs vs ext4
Special Forums Hardware Filesystems, Disks and Memory Gfs2 vs xfs vs ext4 Post 302370830 by Corona688 on Thursday 12th of November 2009 01:55:30 PM
Old 11-12-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by king_hippo
We tried ext3 but it was just too slow
Large ext3 partitions can be slow to fsck, but aren't that bad in operation. It's also important to note that the default ext3 mount options are brain-dead for large, heavily-cached systems; for instance, a commit interval of 5 seconds is rather small, and the default 'ordered' writing mode is extremely safe but sometimes a bottleneck.

On the other hand ext3 is excellent at safety. I've seen ext3 recover from horrible abuse.

Quote:
I am not sure if ext4 is any faster or not.
ext4 is somewhat faster but the difference is not gigantic. Its fsck is much faster than ext3's for partitions larger than hundreds of gigs. I don't feel it's quite mature, though. Only time will tell if it's as reliable as ext3.

Another filesystem you might consider is xfs. It's fairly mature, and designed for huge, fast transfers...
 

8 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. Solaris

Does Solaris support XFS filesytem?

Hi, Does solaris support the XFS file sytems? If so, how can I mount a shared directory from another machine (which is using XFS)? thanks (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: orahi001
3 Replies

2. Filesystems, Disks and Memory

ext4 - ready for production system?

Gidday, Are you using ext4 for production system? Or is it better to opt for a more conservative strategy, like ext3 for instance? What are your experiences? Thanks in advance, Loïc. (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: Loic Domaigne
3 Replies

3. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

[XFS] How to use real-time subvolume

Hi! I created filesystem XFS on partition hda8 with subvolume real-time on partition hda5: mkfs.xfs -r rtdev=/dev/hda5 /dev/hda8 and i mounted it: mount -t xfs -o rtdev=/dev/hda5 /dev/hda8 /xfs But I don't know how can I use this partition hda5 with subvolume real-time. I don't know how to... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: Cadi2108
3 Replies

4. Linux

GFS2 needed or not?

Hey everyone. I am in the process of setting up an iSCSI SAN to function as a log storage device for a number of servers. All of the initiators see the volume, and originally I formatted it with ext3 and went on my merry way. However after some research I'm having concerns that I should nuke the... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: msarro
1 Replies

5. SuSE

iscsi network share + xfs

Hello, we got a MD3000i used as a network share between two servers (say A and B). The problem we are facing is that file/directories created by server A are not visible on server B (and viceversa). It's not a problem with permission (chmod 777 doesn't help). The MD3000i was at first used ony... (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: neutrino
0 Replies

6. Red Hat

XFS - Custom Kernel or Module?

Hey everyone. I am going to be using XFS for a project coming up. We're running RHEL 5.5. Simply typing modprobe xfs works just fine. The kernel module loads without any issue. Is there any issue with doing this and inserting "modprobe xfs" into /etc/rc.modules? Is there a major reason to... (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: msarro
0 Replies

7. Red Hat

Convert ext4 to ext3

Is there any way to conver ext4 to ext3 filesystem without formatting the partition/disk .. Had ext3 filesystem and had converted it to ext4 by issuing following command # tune2fs -O extents,uninit_bg,dir_index /dev/sda1 # fsck -pf /dev/sda1 # blkid /dev/sda1 /dev/sda1:... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: Shirishlnx
1 Replies

8. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

VMWare,XFS and iSCSI issues!

I have a RHEL6 VM that requires the use of remote storage using iSCSI and XFS for the mount point. Here's the issue: With XFS you can't use the _netdev option for your mount point (pause for network) so my mount point doesn't mount properly because the network isn't up yet. I've moved the... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: ksfolsom
3 Replies
fsck.gfs2(8)						      System Manager's Manual						      fsck.gfs2(8)

NAME
fsck.gfs2 - Offline GFS and GFS2 file system checker SYNOPSIS
fsck.gfs2 [OPTION]... DEVICE WARNING
All computers must have the filesystem unmounted before running fsck.gfs2. Failure to unmount from all nodes in a cluster will likely result in filesystem corruption. DESCRIPTION
fsck.gfs2 will check that the GFS or GFS2 file system on a device is structurally valid. It should not be run on a mounted file system. If file system corruption is detected, it will attempt to repair the file system. There is a limit to what fsck.gfs2 can do. If important file system structures are destroyed, such that the checker cannot determine what the repairs should be, reparations could fail. GFS2 is a journaled file system, and as such should be able to repair damage to the file system on its own. However, faulty hardware has the ability to write incomplete blocks to a file system thereby causing corruption that GFS2 cannot fix. The first step to ensuring a healthy file system is the selection of reliable hardware (i.e. storage systems that will write complete blocks - even in the event of power failure). Note: Most file system checkers will not check the file system if it is "clean" (i.e. unmounted since the last use). The fsck.gfs program behaves differently because the storage may be shared among several nodes in a cluster, and therefore problems may have been introduced on a different computer. Therefore, fsck.gfs2 will always check the file system unless the -p (preen) option is used, in which case it fol- lows special rules (see below). OPTIONS
-a Same as the -p (preen) option. -f Force checking even if the file system seems clean. -h Help. This prints out the proper command line usage syntax. -q Quiet. -n No to all questions. By specifying this option, fsck.gfs2 will only show the changes that would be made, but not make any changes to the filesystem. -p Preen (same as -a: automatically repair the file system if it is dirty, and safe to do so, otherwise exit.) Note: If the file system has locking protocol lock_nolock, the file system is considered a non-shared storage device and the fsck is deemed safe. However, fsck.gfs2 does not know whether it was called automatically from the init process, due to options in the /etc/fstab file. Therefore, if the locking protocol is lock_dlm and -a or -p was specified, fsck.gfs2 cannot determine whether the disk is mounted by other nodes in the cluster. Therefore, the fsck is deemed to be unsafe and a warning is given if any damage or dirty journals are found. In that case, the file system should be unmounted from all nodes in the cluster and fsck.gfs2 should be run manually without the -a or -p options. -V Version. Print out the program version information. -v Verbose operation. Print more information while running. -y Yes to all questions. By specifying this option, fsck.gfs2 will not prompt before making changes. fsck.gfs2(8)
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:10 AM.
Unix & Linux Forums Content Copyright 1993-2022. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy