New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question

[Adam Vande More]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Kaya Saman <SamanKaya at netscape.net> wrote:

> I know how strong UFS v.1 is as I use it with Solaris 9, but how about UFS
> v.2 which is what FreeBSD runs?? When compared with ext3 from a
> performance/reliability perspective which one comes on top?
>

I would say ufs2 easily wins, but remember this is the freebsd-questions
list ;)  There are some differences though, ufs2 uses softupdates, not
journaling(journaling is available and easy to implement via gjournal).
Softupdates I believe are a little faster than journaling, but it's drawback
is long disk checking after a dirty shutdown.  I've never had a ufs specific
issue in hundreds if not thousands of deployments, but nothing is
guaranteed.  ufs does have a great track records and bunch of service hours
logged.


>
> Also if something goes wrong with the filesystem what are the tools to
> check the drive and repair errors as in Linux I use e2fsck followed by
> device ID.
>

Example after a dirty shutdown:

 fsck -y


> In fact I am only really after ZFS for its self healing properties as I
> don't mind going with any file system as long as it's stable. Ext3 although
> easily repairable is quite unstable on my systems anyway!


That's actually a bit disconcerting, do you have hardware instability?

-- 
Adam Vande More