“The file system is one of the most important parts of an operating system. The file system stores and manages user data on disk drives, and ensures that what’s read from storage is identical to what was originally written. In addition to storing user data in files, the file system also creates and manages information about files and about itself.” Read the long article by JFS’ own Steve Best.
Advanced Linux file Systems are Bigger, Faster, and More Reliable
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Been waiting all day to read some comments on this article.. nothing. Well, having read the first page of the article and forwarding it to all my coworkers I have determined that XFS is the best filesystem.
Actually I prefer XFS for sentimental reasons, but I heard it was the best performing a while back. Does the article confirm my suspicious or am I plain wrong?
I can create a single 18 EB filesystem and use half of it for 1 file.
Since most of my harddrives are around 80GB that means I can create a raid spanning a little over 200 million drives. That may take me a while. But the best thing is I would be able to record the rest of my life with an NTSC DV firewire camera into a single file, then extract every single image, 30 of them per second of my life, and make a couple backups just in case. I think that’s what SGI was planning when they designed it.
now for the OT part
the article author links to a page for ACL’s in linux, when will the linux kernel finally have proper acl support that doesnt need a 3rd party patch?
I’m just wondering what level of support does linux have for the Fast File System used by the BSDs…?
I’m just wondering what level of support does linux have for the Fast File System used by the BSDs…?
Decent read only support. Of course none of the more exotic features are supported (writing is barely supported)
XFS seems to be faster than Ext3 when things come to erasing and creating files, but slower when doing multiple file accesses / file searching.
Also, when my XFS-powered Linux box crashes (power outage etc) then I tend to end up with several lost / 0-byte files. Doesnt happen with Ext3.
I’m giving them some time to mature, meanwhile I’m using Ext3 on all new systems I set up.
“Also, when my XFS-powered Linux box crashes (power outage etc) then I tend to end up with several lost / 0-byte files. Doesnt happen with Ext3.”
This was a wonderful bug in XFS which I certainly enjoyed dealing with. Basically if a metadata operation was journed before the write cache was flushed and the system lost power it would destroy the file whose metadata was journaled.
I believe this was fixed some time ago, but it was nevertheless a serious issue. There are certainly painful drawbacks to early adoption.
(o)BFS is the solution!
Michael Vinícius de Oliveira
BlueEyedOS Webmaster
1. Michael Vinícius de Oliveira, BeOS is dead, Gone. Finished, right down there with pet rocks and mood rings. You’re like the 50 somethings who think that the summer of love is still going since they’re so spaced out on the electric Pua they have smoken for the last 30years.
2. JFS as a filesystem from what I have read has a defragmenter, however, apparently it is not really required as such, however, it is still made available to those who feel the urge to defrag the hard disk. It is not available on Linux yet as the group is more concerned with getting the filesystem stablised.
3. UFS, personally I prefer UFS. UFS2 is extending the filesytem to 64bit, ACL support added, background fscking and some other nifty stuff. As for the filesystem itself, I just feel a little safer using a filesystem like UFS that is pretty mature in comparision to the more newer, nifty ones.
http://www.openbeos.org/
BeOS isn’t dead
Praise BeOS!