Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Preferred Filesystem

ext2
2% (21 votes)
ext3
22% (289 votes)
ext4
59% (790 votes)
ReiserFS
4% (55 votes)
Reiser4
2% (27 votes)
XFS
7% (91 votes)
JFS
2% (26 votes)
other
3% (43 votes)
Total votes: 1342

you missed btrfs ;)

I'm personally using ext4 on all my systems at the moment with the view to moving to btrfs when opensuse allows it as an install option (unless I missed it in the latest snapshots)...

The advantage of cached filesystems is a huge performance gain and should only be used on systems with a UPS.
(unless you manage to crash linux somehow, which does happen to me non infrequently but can always be traced back to known issues)

If you want speed you risk data loss, but if you want data security you lose speed.
Always has been and always will be.

Money appears to fix this problem i.e. setting up a RAID server, but there is always a compromise or sacrifice for the feature that is most demanded, although with a complex RAID array the compromise is only money which is great if you have that much of it Wink

Ext4

Smart people use XFS, end of story. No next-next clicking into Ext4.

In 1998, my CAD workstaton was an SGI system running a 64 bit IRIX OS over XFS. It was used to model the parts of a complete car by a major motor corporation. And now, in 2010, people should settle with 32 bit Ext4!? Only if they don't know better.

ext4 purely for the speed of

ext4 purely for the speed of fsck.

More in Tux Machines

Ubuntu Kylin 15.10 Beta 1 Is Out with Updated Software Center, Linux Kernel 4.1 LTS

As part of the release of Ubuntu 15.10 (Wily Werewolf) Beta 1 for opt-in flavors, the Ubuntu Kylin team had the pleasure of announcing the immediate availability for download and testing of the first Beta build of the upcoming Ubuntu Kylin 15.10 distro. Read more Also: Kubuntu Wily Beta 1

Leftovers: Ubuntu

Croatian policy encourages open source adoption

Earlier this year, Croatian political party Sustainable Development of Croatia (ORaH) published a new policy that encourages the government to pursue open source solutions, addresses the dangers of vendor lock-in, and insists on open document standards. Best of all, they did it the open source way. Read more

Is Office 365 cheaper than OpenOffice and open source?

Indeed, Microsoft's marketing team published a press release recently saying Office 365 is about 80% cheaper compared to the open source office suite, OpenOffice - with the figures stemming from reports in Italy and the City Council of Pesaro. The Redmond giant claims that to roll out Open Office, Pesaro incurred a one off cost of about €300,000 and had lots of problems with document formatting. But equally how would you convince a public sector organisation to migrate to your cloud services instead of using 'expensive' open source software? The obvious way would be to present a case study from a similar organisation together with a well written report commissioned to an "independent" consultancy firm. At this point your future customer has all the data and justifications required to sign on the dotted line. And some journalists are now presenting this case as fact of Microsoft Office 365 being 80% more economical than open source alternatives. I would argue that this is an isolated case and the PR efforts by big technology vendors, like many other methods, are being used to trick private and public organisations into signing contracts based on data or claims that may be not completely true. Read more