Here's a nice nugget from Slashdot-- Fedora 11 is using it as the default- <br><a href="http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/23/1341237">http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/23/1341237</a><br><br><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Jim Kinney <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jim.kinney@gmail.com">jim.kinney@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Adding to this: Recent XFS seems to have destabilised somehow. Unless<br>
you need single file sizes of 4+GB (i.e. pushing digital video files<br>
around), XFS is not a good idea.<br>
<br>
JFS actually won a filesystem test in the past year or so for overall<br>
usefulness, speed and reliability. It is a good general purpose<br>
filesystem with a solid journalling system.<br>
<br>
EXT3 is quite stable except for a few, odd corner cases. The inability<br>
to recover data inodes from a file deletion is perceived as a bad<br>
thing.<br>
<br>
IF (!!) ZFS ever become available as a GPL addition to the kernel, we<br>
will see some useful things happen in filesystems. ZFS in Solaris is<br>
pretty rock-solid.<br>
<br>
FUSE adds it's own layer of 'funk' to the mix. My experience has been<br>
that fuse is mostly reliable. But an unravelling fuse stream can<br>
destabalise mount-point end of the fuse'ed system. The source end<br>
seems to be unaffected. Half-mounted, locked, unable to remount or<br>
remove when it fizzles from 2.6.26 through 2.6.28. I have not decided<br>
if the issue is with fuse or with the stupid gui mounting tools from<br>
gnome (I'd put my money on gnome hosing something first!). Of course<br>
it's not reliably repeatable breakage either.<br>
<br>
2009/1/23 Michael B. Trausch <<a href="mailto:mike@trausch.us">mike@trausch.us</a>>:<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">> On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 09:04:39 -0500<br>
> Jeff Hubbs <<a href="mailto:hbbs@comcast.net">hbbs@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> These newer filesystems, including the ones used through FUSE - are<br>
>> any of them considered as reliable as ext3, jfs, xfs?<br>
><br>
> I'd imagine that would depend on who you ask. I've had so-called<br>
> stable filesystems totally nuke my data, and filesystems in<br>
> development that never so much as sneezed for me.<br>
><br>
> I trust ext4 because of its common code with ext3. And in fact, ext4<br>
> exposed ext3 to new eyes because there are neophytes out there, and<br>
> bugs were found in ext4 that were inherited from ext3 and then were<br>
> fixed in both. I trust XFS less than I trust FAT32 because I have<br>
> never had a filesystem nuke my data as completely and efficiently as it<br>
> did back in 2.6.25 days. I still see people reporting major bugs<br>
> (data loss ranging from small to extreme) in XFS to the kernel mailing<br>
> list, and I personally wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.<br>
><br>
> Looking at my LKML folder today, I see 22 emails on problems with XFS,<br>
> compared to 6 for ext4. Ted Tso jumped on that thread immediately (the<br>
> ext4 problem, which reported ENOSPC with ~500 MB left on the<br>
> filesystem); turns out the problem is that the user is unable to use<br>
> the very last 1% of their root filesystem, and it's being worked on<br>
> now.<br>
><br>
> I see nothing on JFS; that could mean that there is nobody using that<br>
> filesystem or that it is virtually bug-free. Don't know which. I also<br>
> see nothing for vfat, and 7 messages in 4 threads for btrfs, though<br>
> that is probably because only a few people are attempting to use btrfs<br>
> at this point.<br>
><br>
> As far as FUSE filesystems go, I haven't used many. But I do know that<br>
> of the ones I have used (sshfs, WikipediaFS, NTFS-3G, and Captive NTFS)<br>
> I have never had any problems with the FUSE driver itself. In the case<br>
> of sshfs, the only problem that I have ever had was with the remote<br>
> host dropping the connection after a timeout, which is easily fixed by<br>
> keeping the filesystem active or by just remounting the filesystem. I<br>
> would like to play more with FUSE since the variety of file systems<br>
> available there is kind of impressive. The idea of being able to mount<br>
> just about anything is kind of nice, and being in userspace, there may<br>
> be lossage, but there won't be kernel crashes, and that's a big plus.<br>
> That said, I haven't played enough with any single FUSE filesystem in<br>
> order to be able to make any substantial positive claims on it, but it<br>
> hasn't broke yet for me.<br>
><br>
> --- Mike<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> My sigfile ran away and is on hiatus.<br>
> <a href="http://www.trausch.us/" target="_blank">http://www.trausch.us/</a><br>
><br>
</div></div><div class="Ih2E3d">> _______________________________________________<br>
> Ale mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale" target="_blank">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>--<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
James P. Kinney III<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">_______________________________________________<br>
Ale mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale" target="_blank">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>