On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 21:06 -0500, Mark H. Harris wrote:
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 16:06, Dennis J. Tuchler wrote:
what is the advantage of reiserfs over extn?
The primary advantage of reiserfs over ext3 is performance. Both are journaled. Reiserfs is a b-tree organization, which means that all other things being equal access times for large drives will be faster on reiserfs (generally speaking) than on ext3. On the other hand reiserfs journals only the meta-data and not the contents... but this is usually not a problem, and the performance enhancement of reiserfs makes it the fs of choice (usually).
ext2 is not journaled, and its slow. On the other hand, its been around a long time and its stable as a rock; but, its slo w e r than reiserfs big-time.
If you use a multiple partitions for your setup (and you should) /boot can be ext2 without any problem. If /boot is very small the install will not let you make it journaled; not enough room for the journal reciever. All other partitions /, /home, /var, /tmp, /usr, /work, /opt,,... should all be reiserfs on most systems.
-- Kind regards,
Mark H. Harris <>< harrismh777@earthlink.net
I did a bit of Googling on this as I am curious as well, running FC4 and having no intention of going to FC5, with Linux Mag's SUSE 10.0 full version on the shelf waiting for a slack period to install. I gather this uses reiserfs by default. Searching with <comparison reiserfs ext3 suse> brings the usual zillion results. These two are informative: http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388 http://www.novell.com/documentation/suse91/suselinux-adminguide/html/apa.htm... though the PDF Reference Guide on http://www.novell.com/documentation/suse10/index.html is presumably more up to date, though the bit on formats looks to be the same. Andy Goss