lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: reiserfs, xfs, ext2, ext3
    john slee wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 10:38:14AM +0300, Mart?n Marqu?s wrote:
    > > We are waiting for a server with dual PIII, RAID 1,0 and 5 18Gb scsi disks to
    > > come so we can change our proxy server, that will run on Linux with Squid.
    > > One disk will go inside (I think?) and the other 4 on a tower conected to the
    > > RAID, which will be have the cache of the squid server.
    >
    > that's a pretty huge cache, have you considered using 8*9gb disks
    > instead of 4*18? what sort of request throughput/latency are you
    > aiming for? as the number of requests grows, disk seek times are
    > a very real problem.
    >
    > > One of my partners thinks that we should use reiserfs on all the server (the
    > > partitions of the Linux distro, and the cache partitions), and I found out
    > > that reiserfs has had lots of bugs, and is marked as experimental in kernel
    >
    > well, lots of bugs in reiserfs have been fixed.. obviously there are
    > more bugs to come (as always), but on the whole a lot of people are very
    > happy with it. there certainly haven't been many posts of reiserfs
    > corruption lately at all on linux-kernel.
    >
    > > 2.4.4. Not to mention that the people of RH discourage there users from using
    > > it.
    >
    > they do?
    >
    > > So what I want is to know which is the status of this 3 journaling FS. Which
    > > is the one we should look for?
    >
    > xfs, while wonderful, probably isn't what you're looking for. AFAIK it
    > is intended more for very very very large files.
    >
    > > I think that the data lose is not significant in a proxy cache, if the FS is
    > > really fast, as is said reiserfs is.
    >
    > data loss is always significant. consider the case where you are forced
    > to rebuild the filesystem squid's cache directories reside on...
    > admittedly it is an extreme case, but it is a possibility all the same.
    >
    If you worry about that, put the squid cache in a fs
    of its own. If it ever dies - use mkfs and restart with an empty cache.
    No need to spend a long time fsck'ing something with a limited lifetime
    that can be re-fetched.

    Helge Hafting
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:13.753 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site