Another issue is that Dropbox have announced that henceforth

they will only support ext4.



On 13/10/18 04:09, ~Stack~ wrote:

> On 10/12/2018 07:35 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

> [snip]

>> On SL 7? Why? Is there any reason not to use xfs? I've appreciated the

>> ext filesystems, I've known its original author for decades. (He was

>> my little brother in my fraternity!) But there's not a compelling

>> reason to use it in recent SL releases.

>

> Sure there is. Anyone who has to mange fluctuating disks in an LVM knows

> precisely why you avoid XFS - Shrink an XFS formated LVM partition. Oh,

> wait. You can't. ;-)

>

> My server with EXT4 will be back on line with adjusted filesystem sizes

> before the XFS partition has even finished backing up! It is a trivial,

> well-documented, and quick process to adjust an ext4 file-system.

>

> Granted, I'm in a world where people can't seem to judge how they are

> going to use the space on their server and frequently have to come to me

> needing help because they did something silly like allocate 50G to /opt

> and 1G to /var. *rolls eyes* (sadly that was a true event.) Adjusting

> filesystems for others happens far too frequently for me. At least it is

> easy for the EXT4 crowd.

>

> Also, I can't think of a single compelling reason to use XFS over EXT4.

> Supposedly XFS is great for large files of 30+ Gb, but I can promise you

> that most of the servers and desktops I support have easily 95% of their

> files under 100M (and I would guess ~70% are under 1M). I know this,

> because I help the backup team on occasion. I've seen the histograms of

> file size distributions.

>

> For all the arguments of performance, well I wouldn't use either XFS or

> EXT4. I use ZFS and Ceph on the systems I want performance out of.

>

> Lastly, (I know - single data point) I almost never get the "help my

> file system is corrupted" from the EXT4 crowd but I've long stopped

> counting how many times I've heard XFS eating files. And the few times

> it is EXT4 I don't worry because the tools for recovery are long and

> well tested. The best that can be said for XFS recovery tools is "Well,

> they are better now then they were."

>

> To me, it still boggles my mind why it is the default FS in the EL world.

>

> But that's me. :-)

>

> ~Stack~

>