[Samba] what's the best filesystem

Duncan Robertson Duncan.Robertson at vsl.com.au
Wed Oct 5 02:12:09 GMT 2005

We are also looking into this, as we are examining moving some samba
shares from Solaris to Linux

Also some usage patterns may affect things.. jfs seems to work much
better than ext3 for reading directories with LOTS of files in it, a
situation which not uncommon on large samba shares.

jfs file systems can be grown in place (without unmounting) - but cannot
be shrunk.
jfs you can choose the filename encoding on mount, which can effect the
readability of filenames.

ext3 can be grown and shrunk, but you have to unmount them.

these are more general issues, but can apply to managing a busy samba
server over time..

I have had bad experiences with reiser in the past as well, however that
was a very long time ago - though the experiences were bad enough that I
haven't been tempted to try it again.

On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 09:17 +1000, mourik jan c heupink wrote:
> > I vote for XFS, it is much faster than EXT3 with lower processor
> load when 
> > you get up over 100gigs of storage. I've had some stability issues
> with 
> > software RAID5 though. 
> >    
> Vote for xfs as well. Had some corruption that turned out to be
> faulty  
> hardware. (IBM replaced pretty much the complete inside of my server)
> I like xfs, specially with quota. (and using acl's here as well)
> with xfs you never have to run the check_quota (or whatever the
> command  
> is...) This makes a rebooting after a crash *much* faster.
> mj 
> --  
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the 
> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba

More information about the samba mailing list