Stan Hoeppner <[email protected]> writes: > XFS beats EXT4 hands down in nearly every category, at least for server > workloads. EXT4 may have some advantages on single user workstations > simply from a familiarity standpoint WRT tools, and slightly better > performance with some single user workloads.
I had an account on a server where they switched to XFS (from ext3) after a system upgrade. While XFS seemed to work well enough in general, I encountered one starkly obvious problem with it: deleting large trees of small files was _insanely_ slow (e.g. large source trees), like a couple orders of magnitude slower than ext3. A "rm -rf" that would take a few seconds with ext3 turned into a "go get a coffee and read for a while" event. [I haven't used that system regularly for a few years, so if that behavior was due to an XFS bug, perhaps it's been fixed by now. Still, I wouldn't consider switching to XFS without verifying that...] -miles -- `The suburb is an obsolete and contradictory form of human settlement' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
