To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Fabien Combernous]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 410 bytes --]

Back,

After to get all informations i received, i put them in table as follow:

  see attachment file.

Specialists can they tell me if they agree with my conclusions ?

Thank's for your good job.

Fabien.

-- 

Fabien COMBERNOUS - IT Engineer
eProcess - Parc Club du Millénaire Batiment n° 6
1025 rue Henri Becquerel - 34000 Montpellier FRANCE
http://www.eprocess.fr - +33 (0)4 67 13 84 50

[-- Attachment #2: features --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2432 bytes --]

+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Features \ fs    | xfs | ext3 | jfs | reiserfs |                                Comments                                |
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| mmutable         |  N  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | "Y" is not with same sens. Implementation is not same. Each one permit |
| append-only      |     |      |     |          | some elements that other don't permit and reverse. xfs will have       |
|                  |     |      |     |          | implementation in futur.                                               |
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| quotas           |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | Again "Y" is not aqual. ext3 accept quota only on data-journaled       |
|                  |     |      |     |          | filesystems, but all other journaled filesystem don't have data journal|
|                  |     |      |     |          | About reiserfs you need Chris patches.
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NFS              |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | nfs works on all of them. You need at least reiserfs v3.6.
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| samba            |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | Since Samba is userspace, the fs shouldn't matter (2.2.4 or 2.2.5)     |
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| coda             | coda is a file sys him self |            /               /              /              /             |
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|data journal      |  N  |  Y   |  N  |    N     | Only ext3 can take care of data by a data journal. All other journaled |
|                  |     |      |     |          | file systems have "only" a metadata journal.                           |
+------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Re: To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Nikita Danilov]

Fabien Combernous writes:
 > Back,
 > 
 > After to get all informations i received, i put them in table as follow:
 > 
 >   see attachment file.
 > 
 > Specialists can they tell me if they agree with my conclusions ?
 > 
 > Thank's for your good job.
 > 
 > Fabien.
 > 
 > -- 
 > 
 > Fabien COMBERNOUS - IT Engineer
 > eProcess - Parc Club du Millénaire Batiment n° 6
 > 1025 rue Henri Becquerel - 34000 Montpellier FRANCE
 > http://www.eprocess.fr - +33 (0)4 67 13 84 50
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > | Features \ fs    | xfs | ext3 | jfs | reiserfs |                                Comments                                |
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > | mmutable         |  N  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | "Y" is not with same sens. Implementation is not same. Each one permit |
 > | append-only      |     |      |     |          | some elements that other don't permit and reverse. xfs will have       |
 > |                  |     |      |     |          | implementation in futur.                                               |
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > | quotas           |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | Again "Y" is not aqual. ext3 accept quota only on data-journaled       |
 > |                  |     |      |     |          | filesystems, but all other journaled filesystem don't have data journal|
 > |                  |     |      |     |          | About reiserfs you need Chris patches.
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > | NFS              |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | nfs works on all of them. You need at least reiserfs v3.6.
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > | samba            |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | Since Samba is userspace, the fs shouldn't matter (2.2.4 or 2.2.5)     |
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > | coda             | coda is a file sys him self |            /               /              /              /             |
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 > |data journal      |  N  |  Y   |  N  |    N     | Only ext3 can take care of data by a data journal. All other journaled |
 > |                  |     |      |     |          | file systems have "only" a metadata journal.                           |
 > +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Reiserfs supports data journalling with yet another set of Chris
patches: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/

Nikita.

Re: [Jfs-discussion] To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:45:30PM +0200, Fabien Combernous wrote:
> | mmutable         |  N  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | "Y" is not with same sens. Implementation is not same. Each one permit |
> | append-only      |     |      |     |          | some elements that other don't permit and reverse. xfs will have       |
> |                  |     |      |     |          | implementation in futur.                                               |

neither jfs or reiserfs support this..

> +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | quotas           |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | Again "Y" is not aqual. ext3 accept quota only on data-journaled       |
> |                  |     |      |     |          | filesystems, but all other journaled filesystem don't have data journal|
> |                  |     |      |     |          | About reiserfs you need Chris patches.

jfs doesn't support quotas. 

Re: [ext3-users] To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Andreas Dilger]

On Oct 24, 2002  18:45 +0200, Fabien Combernous wrote:
> +--------+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | quotas | Again "Y" is not aqual. ext3 accept quota only on data-journaled |
> |        | filesystems, but all other journaled filesystem don't have data  |
> +--------+------------------------------------------------------------------+

Granted that I have never used quotas, so it is possible that I
am incorrect.  However, my understanding is that yes, you do need
data-journaled quota files to ensure that your quota tables don't miss
some operations after a crash.  However, you can separately select
data journaling for files in ext3 (via chattr), even if the rest of
the filesystem is using data=ordered (the default).

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/

Re: Re: [ext3-users] To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Chris Mason]

On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 13:08, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2002  18:45 +0200, Fabien Combernous wrote:
> > +--------+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> > | quotas | Again "Y" is not aqual. ext3 accept quota only on data-journaled |
> > |        | filesystems, but all other journaled filesystem don't have data  |
> > +--------+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> 
> Granted that I have never used quotas, so it is possible that I
> am incorrect.  However, my understanding is that yes, you do need
> data-journaled quota files to ensure that your quota tables don't miss
> some operations after a crash.  However, you can separately select
> data journaling for files in ext3 (via chattr), even if the rest of
> the filesystem is using data=ordered (the default).

data journaling on the quota files is better.  Some quota updates (dqput
calling commit_dquot) are done only by clear_inode(), which should
happen outside the transaction and won't be grouped with the actual
metadata change.

-chris

Re: [reiserfs-list] Re: [ext3-users] To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Steve Lord]

On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 12:27, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 13:08, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > On Oct 24, 2002  18:45 +0200, Fabien Combernous wrote:
> > > +--------+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> > > | quotas | Again "Y" is not aqual. ext3 accept quota only on data-journaled |
> > > |        | filesystems, but all other journaled filesystem don't have data  |
> > > +--------+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> > 
> > Granted that I have never used quotas, so it is possible that I
> > am incorrect.  However, my understanding is that yes, you do need
> > data-journaled quota files to ensure that your quota tables don't miss
> > some operations after a crash.  However, you can separately select
> > data journaling for files in ext3 (via chattr), even if the rest of
> > the filesystem is using data=ordered (the default).
> 
> data journaling on the quota files is better.  Some quota updates (dqput
> calling commit_dquot) are done only by clear_inode(), which should
> happen outside the transaction and won't be grouped with the actual
> metadata change.
> 

XFS quota file updates are transactional with the original metadata
change which allocated or freed space. So while we do not have data
journalling, quota updates are journalled.

Steve

-- 

Steve Lord                                      voice: +1-651-683-3511
Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software         email: lord@sgi.com

Re: To compare Linux journalised filesystem, part II.

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:45:30PM +0200, Fabien Combernous wrote:
> +------------------+-----+------+-----+----------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | NFS              |  Y  |  Y   |  Y  |    Y     | nfs works on all of them. You need at least reiserfs v3.6.

NFS will work with reiserfs v3.5 too, just there is a probability of having 
problems with reusing object ids (and therefore the inode numbers too).
 
> |data journal      |  N  |  Y   |  N  |    N     | Only ext3 can take care of data by a data journal. All other journaled |
> |                  |     |      |     |          | file systems have "only" a metadata journal.                           |

No. Chris Mason have set of patches that implement data journaling for reiserfs,
too.

Bye,
    Oleg