From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Pedaschus Subject: Re: Large single raid and XFS or two small ones and EXT3? Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 18:46:18 +0200 Message-ID: <449C1ADA.9010907@gmx.de> References: <449AEB7C.6040108@cjx.com> <449BE381.6070000@cjx.com> <200606231701.44803.a1426z@gawab.com> <20060623160602.GK5817@schatzie.adilger.int> <449C19BF.7060500@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <449C19BF.7060500@gmx.de> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Cc: Andreas Dilger , Al Boldi , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Christian Pedaschus wrote: >for ext3 use (on unmounted disks): >tune2fs -O has_journal -o journal_data /dev/{disk} >tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/{disk} > >if data is on the drive, you need to run a fsck afterwards and it uses a >good bit of ram, but it makes ext3 a good bit faster. > >and my main points for using ext3 is still: "it's a very mature fs, >nobody will tell you such horrible storys about data-lossage with ext3 >than with any other filesystem." >and there are undelete tools for ext3. > >so if you're for data-integrity (i guess you are, else you would not use >raid, or? ;) ), use ext3 and if you need the last single kb/s get a >faster drive or use lots of them with a good raid-combo and/or use a >separate disk for the journal (man 8 tune2fs) > >my 0.5 cents, >greets chris > >ps. but you know, filesystem choosage is not pure science, it's >half-religion :D > > Ops, should be: tune2fs -O has_journal -o journal_data /dev/{partition} tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/{partition} ;)