You are not logged in.

#1 2010-03-23 18:47:44

Sniffer
Member
Registered: 2008-11-10
Posts: 47

JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

Hi,

Just one simple question, in arch beginners guide i see that in partition hard drive / and /home are in JFS while /var is on Reiser....wich is my current configuration on my hard drive:)

Even so i have seen many opinions that say for the home user XFS was the best (back in 2006) and now EXT4 is the current winner regarding performance.

Any idea, light on the matter...why JFS and Reiser still appear on the TUT?

Thanks
Sniff.

Offline

#2 2010-03-23 19:01:55

dr_te_z
Member
From: Zoetermeer, the Netherlands
Registered: 2006-12-06
Posts: 154

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

Nothing wrong with JFS, and the lastest & greatest is no longer ext4: http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7308/


Somewhere between "too small" and "too large" lies the size that is just right.
- Scott Hayes

Offline

#3 2010-03-23 19:09:53

Sniffer
Member
Registered: 2008-11-10
Posts: 47

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

dr_te_z wrote:

Nothing wrong with JFS, and the lastest & greatest is no longer ext4: http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7308/

Thanks for the article.

Will stick with JFS then.;)

Offline

#4 2010-03-25 20:03:46

Misfit138
Misfit Emeritus
From: USA
Registered: 2006-11-27
Posts: 4,170

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

JFS is always my first choice of FS, except for /var, if residing upon its own discrete partition. Until BtrFS becomes mainstream, JFS is an excellent choice; it's extremely stable, mature, well-tested, fast, and is the best choice for older, more anemic CPUs since it uses the least resources of any file system.
Rather than feeling like you are settling for an inferior system, take solace that you have probably the finest compromise between modernity, stability, reliability, features and performance in using JFS.
smile

As for Ext4, I think it was rightly described by one of its own developers as 'merely a stopgap until BtrFS is widely adopted'.

Offline

#5 2010-03-25 20:23:27

Ashren
Member
From: Denmark
Registered: 2007-06-13
Posts: 1,221
Website

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

One drawback of JFS is that it can not be shrunk.

Offline

#6 2010-03-25 20:58:34

tomk
Forum Fellow
From: Ireland
Registered: 2004-07-21
Posts: 9,838

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

Sniffer wrote:

why JFS and Reiser still appear on the TUT?

It states very clearly that it is "An example /etc/fstab". Information is provided on all filesystems, with the expectation that you will decide for yourself what you want to use.

Offline

#7 2010-03-29 09:40:14

Sniffer
Member
Registered: 2008-11-10
Posts: 47

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

tomk wrote:
Sniffer wrote:

why JFS and Reiser still appear on the TUT?

It states very clearly that it is "An example /etc/fstab". Information is provided on all filesystems, with the expectation that you will decide for yourself what you want to use.

I understand...but in a guide i think who made it will give it opinion, what he thinks it's best...for an example, OK a stupid one....he could put there ext2 on all partitions big_smile

Thanks for the clear up.

Offline

#8 2011-07-13 08:47:35

mips1
Member
Registered: 2008-01-02
Posts: 99

Re: JFS Vs EXT4 - Ideas

Misfit138 wrote:

JFS is always my first choice of FS, except for /var, if residing upon its own discrete partition. Until BtrFS becomes mainstream, JFS is an excellent choice; it's extremely stable, mature, well-tested, fast, and is the best choice for older, more anemic CPUs since it uses the least resources of any file system.
Rather than feeling like you are settling for an inferior system, take solace that you have probably the finest compromise between modernity, stability, reliability, features and performance in using JFS.
smile

As for Ext4, I think it was rightly described by one of its own developers as 'merely a stopgap until BtrFS is widely adopted'.

Any idea how btrfs compares to jfs when it comes to cpu/resource usage?

For now I'm a happy JFS users.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB