IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Oracle cluster file system
[link|http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs2-tools/dist/documentation/users_guide.txt|http://oss.oracle.co...n/users_guide.txt]

It seems Oracle has GPLed the RAC file system, which means it can be used for general workload. Has anyone here used it?
New Nope... Not yet anyway.
I am curious as to how good it is.

Less than impressed with ReiserFS 3.6 or 4.x
Less than thrilled with ext3 (or ext2 for that matter)
JFS seems a good selection but not quite what I was hoping for...
XFS is closer than any of the others.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
[image|http://www.danasoft.com/vipersig.jpg||||]
New Agreed - XFS is the best
New Why is that?
My google-fu is weak and I can't find anything to say why XFS is superiour to ReiserFS or ext3.

Wade.
Save Fintlewoodlewix
New Some benchmarks with a 2.6x kernel
[link|http://fsbench.netnation.com/|Here]:

Best bang for your buck - JFS or XFS:
While not the fastest file systems, both of them consistently perform close to EXT2, while using minimal CPU. XFS seems to be faster over a wider range of benchmarks, however it does use slightly more CPU than JFS. While JFS really starts to slow down with lots of files.

For I/O limited applications - ReiserFS v4, XFS, or ReiserFS v3:
This category isn't as clear cut as the others, it really depends on how many files, and what the size of the files are.

[link|http://www.namesys.com/|ReiserFS v4] is by far the fastest file system benchmarked here, but keep in mind it is still *EXPERIMENTAL*. However its performance in the Bonnie++ benchmark deserves recognition, up to 95% faster than EXT3, and 65% faster than ReiserFS v3 is mighty impressive. Though the IOZone benchmarks are not so convincing, there still seem to be some issues to work out. ReiserFS v4 will definiately be worth while keeping an eye on, especially considering some of the exciting new features it offers. Hopefully it gets included in Linus's v2.6 kernel tree.

If your application primarily uses lots of smaller files, ReiserFS v3 is the way to go. If your application uses more medium to larger files, and not a whole lot of them, XFS would most likely be a wise choice.

For CPU limited applications - JFS:
JFS is the clear winner here. If your looking for the absolute least CPU usage, JFS takes the cake.


FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Ah. Thankee.
I knew ext3 was a bit of an "we can add journalling to ext2!" effort. I didn't realize Linux 2.6.8 still only had Reiserv3. Might be handy to get some upgrades happening at work...

Wade.
Save Fintlewoodlewix
New I tested a whole bunch of large file IO.
Dual Opteron, 3Ware SATA controller, 6 disks, both raid 5 and raid 10.

XFS GREATLY outperformed ext3, was much better than reiser and JFS, for my type of work. The only thing that came close was ext2, but that's not journaling.
     Oracle cluster file system - (broomberg) - (6)
         Nope... Not yet anyway. - (folkert) - (5)
             Agreed - XFS is the best -NT - (broomberg) - (4)
                 Why is that? - (static) - (3)
                     Some benchmarks with a 2.6x kernel - (Another Scott) - (1)
                         Ah. Thankee. - (static)
                     I tested a whole bunch of large file IO. - (broomberg)

Hello, boys and girls, this is your old pal Stinky Wizzleteats!
88 ms