- Original Message
From: Mariusz Kruk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: ReiseFS vs XFS
Date: 27/09/05 23:55
> Not necesarily.
> leafnode - yes. one file per message (or even worse than that).
> inn - can be IIRC configured to work t
On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 11:48 -0400, Bradley Alexander wrote:
> You mentioned a "home" computer. I have more than one system in my home that
> are multiuser, which kicks in security rules. Personally, I have four rules
> for partitioning securely. Rules 1 and 2 grew out of the days when filling /
John Hasler napisał(a):
[NNTP servers work with ] gazillions of small files.
Mariusz Kruk writes:
leafnode - yes.
and cnews.
inn - can be IIRC configured to work this way but can also work with big
cycbuf files.
Thus making the contents of the spool inaccessible to anything but inn.
Yep.
I wrote:
> [NNTP servers work with ] gazillions of small files.
Mariusz Kruk writes:
> leafnode - yes.
and cnews.
> inn - can be IIRC configured to work this way but can also work with big
> cycbuf files.
Thus making the contents of the spool inaccessible to anything but inn.
--
John Hasler
On Monday 26 September 2005 11:59 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Who said you shouldn't? I think you are not understanding
>
> "That's JUST you", to my not-native-english-speaker skills is a sarcastic
> way to say "nobody else but you". So, I replied with a reason why many
> admini
John Hasler napisał(a):
I meant, "do nntd daemons work with A Few Big Files, or One File Per
Message?
Gazillions of small files.
Not necesarily.
leafnode - yes. one file per message (or even worse than that).
inn - can be IIRC configured to work this way but can also work with big
cycbuf file
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:35:58 -0500
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ron Johnson writes:
> > I meant, "do nntd daemons work with A Few Big Files, or
> > One File Per Message?
>
> Gazillions of small files.
Sounds like that's right up ReiserFS's alley.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Ron Johnson writes:
> I meant, "do nntd daemons work with A Few Big Files, or One File Per
> Message?
Gazillions of small files.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 27/09/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Dick,
>
>
> > I'm actually starting to think about giving each user their own
> > partition, since it's so little hassle.
> >
> Would that be feasable in an enviroment with 40.000 mail users ? ;-)
I don't run an environment with 400
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:02:14 -0300
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:50:53 -0300
> > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> > >
I must get some sleep. Here's a proofread version of my reply :)
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:50:53 -0300
> > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, [EMAI
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:50:53 -0300
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> > > > I'm actually starting to think about giving each user
> > > > their own partition, since it's so lit
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> On Monday 26 September 2005 07:20 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > That's JUST you. I backup / as well, so...
> >
> > Please explain to me why should I NOT care that I can still remote connect
> > through the serial console to a system where /home,
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:50:53 -0300
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > I'm actually starting to think about giving each user
> > > their own partition, since it's so little hassle.
> > >
> > Would that be feasable in an env
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'm actually starting to think about giving each user their own
> > partition, since it's so little hassle.
> >
> Would that be feasable in an enviroment with 40.000 mail users ? ;-)
Nah. But if you have 4 mail users, and that translates to 40
I have posted a URL for a wikipedia link on the same email that you
quoted me from. That's where I got the information.
On 9/26/05, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Malcolm Lalkaka wrote:
> > ReiserFS is faster than ext3 ONLY for files under 4kB. In suc
On Monday 26 September 2005 07:20 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > That's JUST you. I backup / as well, so...
>
> Please explain to me why should I NOT care that I can still remote connect
> through the serial console to a system where /home, /usr and /var is hosed,
> but / is still OK so
Hello Dick,
> I'm actually starting to think about giving each user their own
> partition, since it's so little hassle.
>
Would that be feasable in an enviroment with 40.000 mail users ? ;-)
I understood that basically Scsi HDD can have 15 partitions max and
IDE/SATA f.e. 64 partitions max.
Am
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:51:09 -0300
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > I don't have a link, but I do know that Reiser can pack
> > multiple small files into 1 block (tail packing). Thus,
> > if
>
> I have been told that reiser3 tai
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> On Monday 26 September 2005 05:44 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> > > On Monday 26 September 2005 11:27 am, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> > > > > Why is it
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> On Monday 26 September 2005 05:42 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> > > > /lib, /sbin, /bin, /boot and a few other oddities (certianly not /home,
> > > > /srv, /usr, /var or /tmp), then you really are better off us
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 17:27:08 -0400
Brendan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 25 September 2005 03:35 pm, Henrique de Moraes
> Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > For / , why not use ext3?
> >
> > Agreed. ext3 is stable, quite fast enough (IF you're
> > using kern
On Monday 26 September 2005 05:44 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> > On Monday 26 September 2005 11:27 am, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> > > > Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> >
On Monday 26 September 2005 05:42 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> > > /lib, /sbin, /bin, /boot and a few other oddities (certianly not /home,
> > > /srv, /usr, /var or /tmp), then you really are better off using ext3
> > > there for safety.
> >
> > I d
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> I don't have a link, but I do know that Reiser can pack
> multiple small files into 1 block (tail packing). Thus, if
I have been told that reiser3 tailpacking is extremely hideous for
performance. That must be kept in mind as well.
--
"One disk to ru
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> On Monday 26 September 2005 11:27 am, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> > > Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> > > for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
> >
> > So that your / i
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> > /lib, /sbin, /bin, /boot and a few other oddities (certianly not /home,
> > /srv, /usr, /var or /tmp), then you really are better off using ext3 there
> > for safety.
>
> I disagree. Could you tell me why you present this as fact?
Because it has made my lif
On Monday 26 September 2005 11:27 am, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> > Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> > for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
>
> So that your / is as static as possible. And decoupled from abo
On Sunday 25 September 2005 03:35 pm, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > For / , why not use ext3?
>
> Agreed. ext3 is stable, quite fast enough (IF you're using kernel 2.6 and
> enable all optionals) and it is extremely *safe*. AND it has the best set
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:55:49 -0300
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Malcolm Lalkaka wrote:
> > ReiserFS is faster than ext3 ONLY for files under 4kB. In
> > such a case, you can expect to experience faster speeds
> > than ext3 by a factor of 10
>
> Com
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 08:11:24 -0700 (PDT)
Daniel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
> home
> computer. Isnt it more painful to have to calculate
> the size for each partition
Why should
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 08:11:24AM -0700, Daniel Garcia wrote:
>
> Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
> home
> computer. Isnt it more painful to have to calculate
> the size for each partition
>
> Thanks
> Daniel
Whe I upgr
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Alvin Oga wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Rob Benton wrote:
I've lost data and a whole partition using xfs. I wouldn't call it
stable. I use reiser now.
XFS *is* stable now, as long as you don't do a "don't do that" thing like
two MDs o
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
> home
> computer. Isnt it more painful to have to calculate
> the size for each partition
rasputnik> * If /home gets hosed, you can still get
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Alvin Oga wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Rob Benton wrote:
> > I've lost data and a whole partition using xfs. I wouldn't call it
> > stable. I use reiser now.
XFS *is* stable now, as long as you don't do a "don't do that" thing like
two MDs on top of each other (to get RAID
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Malcolm Lalkaka wrote:
> ReiserFS is faster than ext3 ONLY for files under 4kB. In such a case,
> you can expect to experience faster speeds than ext3 by a factor of 10
Come to think of it, where did you get these numbers from?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to fi
On Monday 26 September 2005 11:25 am, Dick Davies wrote:
> On 26/09/05, Daniel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> > for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
> > home computer.
You mentioned a "home" computer. I have more than on
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
So that your / is as static as possible. And decoupled from about as much
as possible. The first time you have problems with memory or disks, yo
On 26/09/05, Daniel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Why is it interesting to have a different partition
> for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
> home
> computer. Isnt it more painful to have to calculate
> the size for each partition
>
> Thanks
> Daniel
off the top of my hea
Why is it interesting to have a different partition
for / and for /home? I have never seen the point in a
home
computer. Isnt it more painful to have to calculate
the size for each partition
Thanks
Daniel
--- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Ron John
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Rob Benton wrote:
> I've lost data and a whole partition using xfs. I wouldn't call it
> stable. I use reiser now.
that'd depend on:
- which glibc, which kernel, which version of xfs vs reiserfs
i've lost partitions and/or files with all of the fs including ext3
On 9/25/05, Daniel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
> use: the ReiseFS or XFS. Is it possible to do a whole
> installation of the Debian system (testing) with XFS.
> I will use the netinst ISO.
>
http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.h
Daniel Garcia wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
use: the ReiseFS or XFS. Is it possible to do a whole
installation of the Debian system (testing) with XFS.
If you only deal with small file sizes, Reiserfs/Reiser4fs is the best
option.
If you go for a lot of
On Sun, 2005-09-25 at 16:30 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, David Clymer wrote:
> > If you are planning on doing LVM, use XFS. XFS will allow you to resize
> > a filesytem on the fly - no need to umount, resize, remount, etc. I've
>
> No. It will alow you to *grow*
On Sun, 2005-09-25 at 20:57 +0100, Dick Davies wrote:
> On 25/09/05, David Clymer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If you are planning on doing LVM, use XFS. XFS will allow you to resize
> > a filesytem on the fly - no need to umount, resize, remount, etc. I've
> > found this to be a very handy fe
On 9/25/05, Daniel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
> use: the ReiseFS or XFS. Is it possible to do a whole
> installation of the Debian system (testing) with XFS.
> I will use the netinst ISO.
>
> Thank you
> Daniel
It really depen
On 25/09/05, David Clymer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you are planning on doing LVM, use XFS. XFS will allow you to resize
> a filesytem on the fly - no need to umount, resize, remount, etc. I've
> found this to be a very handy feature:
>
> $ lvresize --size +1G /dev/vg0/foo
> $ xfs_growfs /fo
Daniel Garcia wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
use: the ReiseFS or XFS. Is it possible to do a whole
installation of the Debian system (testing) with XFS.
I will use the netinst ISO.
Thank you
Daniel
__
Yahoo!
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> For / , why not use ext3?
Agreed. ext3 is stable, quite fast enough (IF you're using kernel 2.6 and
enable all optionals) and it is extremely *safe*. AND it has the best set
of recovery tools I know of, should you actually need them.
If you are doing a p
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, David Clymer wrote:
> If you are planning on doing LVM, use XFS. XFS will allow you to resize
> a filesytem on the fly - no need to umount, resize, remount, etc. I've
No. It will alow you to *grow* the filesystem. It doesn't allow reducing,
AFAIK.
--
"One disk to rule them
On Sun, 2005-09-25 at 09:45 -0700, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
> use: the ReiseFS or XFS. Is it possible to do a whole
> installation of the Debian system (testing) with XFS.
> I will use the netinst ISO.
If you are planning on doing LVM,
On 25/09/05, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For / , why not use ext3?
Reiser is faster, isn't it?
--
Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 09:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
Daniel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
> use: the ReiseFS or XFS. Is it possible to do a whole
> installation of the Debian system (testing) with XFS.
> I will use the netinst ISO.
For / ,
hi ya
> > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> > I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
> > use: the ReiseFS or XFS.
and you will be tested on the differences between each FS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems
c ya
alvin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Daniel Garcia wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know wich is the best filesystem to
> use: the ReiseFS or XFS.
what do you need it to do ?? ( it does make some difference )
- given reierfs or xfs ... i'd use the lastest xfs-2.6.36
- always use the lastest fs .. not old
55 matches
Mail list logo
