[ale] Comparing EXT4 and JFS

Kenneth Price neth.price at gmail.com
Wed Feb 4 16:43:45 EST 2009


I'm also looking into EXT4, but as compared to XFS, not JFS.   EXT4 sounds
great so far, but not sure if it's capabilities yet outweigh it's youth.

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer at gmail.com>wrote:

> As to performance, I don't know much about JFS, but XFS is notoriously
> slow at file create / delete.
>

What?  I've been using XFS on a couple NFS servers for a couple years now.
One exports Maildir repositories to a cluster of Qmail/Courier mail servers,
and the other exports web directories to a cluster of Apache webservers, as
well as acts as a backup server for my production VPS servers (each single
file ranges from 4Gb to 80Gb in size).  XFS beats the pants off ReiserFS and
EXT3 when reading/writing a bunch of small files.  I haven't noticed a
difference one way or the other on creating large files, but deleting them
is much faster in XFS.

Seems like XFS used to take a couple minutes to do the delete!!!
> Obviously not a good choice of filesystem if you plan to do a lot of
> kernel development.


WHAT?  In my real world experiences XFS is *much* faster than EXT3 at
deleting large files - as well as large directories of small files.  Is your
comment from personal experience?  Using a 2.6.X kernel?

-Ken
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20090204/d295050e/attachment.html 


More information about the Ale mailing list