similar to: Re: Samba vs. Windows : significant difference intimestamp handling ?

>> > > Fine. Use reiserfs and don't worry about ctime. >> > >> > Why? Does reiserfs handle ctime in a different >> > way than other linux filesystems? >> >> It's not supposed to given the same instructions >> from clients but it appears to because perhaps it >> elicits different kind of response from Office. >> Maybe

|> mtime being changed is beyond the pale. I suspect |> ext3 is the problem. I heard some people losing all |> of their data on ext3-formatted disks. Stay away |> from it. | | Do you have some facts to back up that load of FUD? | By all accounts I've ever seen, Ext. 3 has been | stable for *long* time before it was even included | in the stock Kernel tree. Do you want to

>>>> Fine. Use reiserfs and don't worry about ctime. >>>> >>> But reiserfs doesn´t support ACLs. Does it? >> >> Oh yes, it does. Big way. >> > ?? > > I was under the impression that if i wanted acls, i > should use xfs, ext3 (or jsf i believe) but NOT > reisersf. > > Am I wrong? Does (for example) SuSE 8.2 with >

We are looking at implementing a Linux box running samba in the near future with about 1TB of disk online. The purpose of this box will be for basic file and printer sharing needs. I am doing research on the different journaling file systems avaible in RH 7.3 and up (ext3, reiserFS, and JFS) and was wondering if anyone has had any real world experience with them (mostly reiserFS and JFS) and

Hi I plan to set up a big file server, something like motherboard with 4 ide ports and an additional 4 ide daughter card, a PIV proc and 512 or 1024 MB ram, a 100 or 1000 MB NIC, with 6 or 7 200 GB ide HDDs in a sigle box. I don't need lightning performance, just disk space. Of course this would be served by some linux os and samba questions (relative to samba configuration and behaviour) :

Dear Listmembers, I try to work with samba (newest rpm for SuSE, 3.0.1.pre2, but that does not matter, the effect was there in 2.2.7 and 2.2.8a too) on an sufficient armed system (the system does not matter either, I have tried it on different machines) using ReiserFS (version 3.6.4-12). When accessing one share from one machine (i.e. copying two or more files at a time to or from the share)

Hi! I was just wondering how Ext3 and Reiserfs compare. When I reinstalled my server (because of a stupid hacker) I took the opportunity to change to ReiserFS. And I have to say it's really much faster than Ext3. I don't have benchmarks, but for example, stuff like "make dep" on the linux kernel is much faster (even though I had enabled write cache when I was using ext3). So

Hi, I've heard that for Dovecot/Mailir systems there are filesystems that are optimised for the situation of many small files in one folder. Could I possibly have some feedback on what the recommended filesystems are? I've heard of ReiserFS but was wondering what other options there are and how they compare. If I get a good comprehensive response I'll build a wiki summary page

thanks very much for your kind and fast assistance! greetings from holland. mourik jan > -----Original Message----- > From: Dragan Krnic [mailto:dkrnic@lycos.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 11:19 > To: mourik jan c heupink > Cc: samba@lists.samba.org > Subject: Re: Samba vs. Windows : significant difference in > timestamphandling? > > > > and (now that

|> Do you want to say that nobody ever lost any data on |> ext3-formatted disks? Be realistic. |> |> But does it warrant my exhortation to stay away from |> it? Probably not. It was a joke without a smiley |> sign. ext3 is probably a solid, though a bit clumsy |> and slow fs. |> |> I appreciate your criticism. I jumped the same way |> when someone else used the same

I am unable to boot Dom0 on a machine with Reiser file systems. Reiser support is built into the xen0 kernel. I have similar setup with ext3 file systems working just fine, so I don''t think it is a setup problem. I have tried booting with and without and initrd file, booting with the original Linux distro initrd file, etc, but nothing seems to work. I recall seeing a thread about ReiserFS

I am currently running a Windows XP system at home with around 100+ Mb in use over ~400Mb of NTFS file systems. I am installing CentOS 4.4 on it when I change out the mobo/cpu/mem/video combo I just bought. I want to convert all the file systems to (probably) Reiserfs or maybe ext3, but I need to do them one at a time because I only have enough transfer space to accommodate the largest one, or

Hi All. What is the status of ReiserFS in CentOS at the moment? I have some servers which use it as a loadable kernel module. I am thinking about a filesystem for database systems and would like to know if ReiserFS will be maintained in CentOS/Linux kernel in the future? Best regards, Rafal.

XFS is the best filesystem. David Weinehall wrote: >On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:33:13PM -0700, Dax Kelson wrote: > > >>On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 09:34, Peter Nelson wrote: >> >> >>>Hans Reiser wrote: >>> >>>I'm confused as to why performing a benchmark out of cache as opposed to >>>on disk would hurt performance? >>>

Now that I've been enlightened to the terrible write performance of ext3 on my new 3Ware RAID 5 array, I'm stuck choosing an alternative filesystem. I benchmarked XFS, JFS, ReiserFS and ext3 and they came back in that order from best to worst performer. I'm leaning towards XFS because of performance and because centosplus makes kernel modules available for the stock kernel.

I really hope someone has a clue on this one.... :) I've got a 2.2TB array mounted on a 3ware 9500 controller. I installed it last week ensuring that LBA was enabled and using gpt with parted to get the full size available on one array. I also think I chose reiserfs for the array. We then moved ALOT of data to the array. Problem now is that after a reboot LBA doesn't seem to be in

hi I read ( I think in dovecot wiki) that ext2 or ext3 fs on a 2.4 kernel can get slow due to the number of files in a directory. Does anyone know if kernel 2.6 has similar limitation? I'm not at that point now, but before the box goes live, I'm wondering if I should resolve that. Glenn

Hi! Are these results i got from my benchmarking "normal" or is there something strange happening in my system? This box is going to be a mailserver, so i tested various fs to decide on which i should utilize. I personally dislike reiserfs because it has proven somehow unreliable on our servers (although it got better in the more recent kernels), ext3 would be quite good (fsck'ing

Hello List, does anyone have also problems with Samba, OpenLDAP and RaiserFS? We have a LDAP on three servers and only the one who runs under RaiserFS crashed every week. Whats your opinion? matze

Hi, I am upgrading the tomsrtbt rescue distribution from kernel 2.0.39 to 2.2.20. Fitting a 2.4.x kernel on the floppy is not practical at this time. I am trying to support both ext3 and reiser filesystems. However, there are symbol collisions, it is impossible to use both. Is there any chance of getting the 2.2.x patch fixed? -Thanks -Tom