I too asked this question ; there are a lot of comparison around the net. But not from the benchmark, ...; just from my experience. I tested all of those.
Reiserfs still has stability problem and it uses system resources more than others. Not JFS serious stability ; absolutely not XFS: Good, stable, fast. But too heavy kernel image you will get. Difficult to install from scratch. (you have to have two partition, first install as usuall, then complie your own XFS kernel and tool then make xfs the other partition , transfer. In short it is long time and the kernel patch is only available for a limited kernel series (only linus) ext3 Good, stable, fast. It is easy you can install in the native ext2 and after that you make it to journalling without any problem. If you need more infor how to do, email me or do some searching :-) One point you should know, XFS, JFS, Reiserfs is journalling meta data only. ext3 journalling both data and meta data as well. Just my 2 cent... --- Philipp Zabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hi! > this is perhaps somewhat off-topic, but the reason > for my question is not... > > I'm installing woody on a dell i8k notebook and want > to use a journaling > file system for the partition that shall contain > /usr, /var and /home. > I asked myself (and now ask you) what fs would be > appropriate? > It seems that ReiserFS and XFS are both relatively > stable now and > not too hard to install cleanly. > Is there a place where journaling fs are compared, > or are there any > reasons why I should or should not use rfs/xfs/jfs > on a notebook? > thanks! > > grusz > pHilipp Zabel > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ===== S.KIEU _____________________________________________________________________________ http://messenger.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Messenger - Voice chat, mail alerts, stock quotes and favourite news and lots more!
