On 10/6/2017, 8:53:27 AM, Philip Webb <purs...@ca.inter.net> wrote: > 171005 christos kotsis wrote: >> I just noticed that ReiserFS has significant performance >> over ext3, 4 when dealing with small files.
> I've long relied on ReiserFS for everything except /boot > & have never had any problems with my files or drives. > I have many small files + a few big PDFs -- perhaps c 20 MB ea -- > & the big ones simply stay where I put them, so no changes to handle. I used ReiserFS for many - 8+ - years on our old mail server, selected for its performance with large numbers of small (maildir) files, and never had a problem. But during the last rebuild when virtualizing everything, sometime around 2012, I switched to XFS, and believe I saw a performance gain, and no more long fsck's during the rare reboots... and again, no problems. Personally, I can't wait until btrfs is fully ready/stable, and have been considering FreeBSD (or FreeNAS) just for ZFS, for the reliability factor, but have wondered about performance for mail servers. Anyone have any experience with comparing performance with either btrfs or ZFS against either ReiserFS or XFS for a maildir based mail server? Although, I will also be switching to dovecot's mdbox format when I set up my next server, so the issue of lots of small files won't be nearly as big.
