XFS

[Michael Hipp]

Gary Wilson wrote:
> Is anyone using XFS? I have an 18TB NAS that I have to set up. I've 
> always used ext3. But fsck for 18TB is unbearable to think about. XFS 
> seems to be actively supported, but the one time I used it a couple of 
> years ago was disastrous. A sudden shutdown of the system left the 
> partition unrecoverable. Linux Journal this month has a 
> Point/Counterpoint 'debate' on Ext3 vs. XFS but it's not conclusive. Any 
> suggestions, recommendations?

I used XFS on several systems a few years ago. Then went through a spate of 
problems where the apc daemon was shutting down prematurely with near full 
batteries. This happened several times. Also had a UPS go bad and shut off a 
system.

XFS was unrecoverable in most cases. The xfs tools would run forever, spit lots 
of scary stuff to the screen, and then give up. Had to restore from backups.

I've had these same kinds of systems crash hard in a variety of scenarios with 
ext3 and was able to recover in every case I can remember. Never needed the 
backups. I'd have little worry to walk up to any ext3 system and yank the cord 
out of the wall at any moment. That's worth something.

Having good hardware and infrastructure is a must. But I can't excuse a 
filesystem that is evidently so *delicate* that it can't recover from a hard 
poweroff. What, exactly, is the point of a journaling file system for if not 
for that? <scratches head>

I know XFS has many things to recommend it. But I think "robustness" isn't 
among them.

Just my experiences.

Michael

P.S. But before I'd put 18TB on ext3, I'd figure out a way to bear the periodic 
downtime for preventative fscks.

P.P.S. Why does the choice always seem to come down to a contest between ext3 
and xfs? Aren't there others worth considering that perhaps represent some 
middleground?