[mythtv-users] My experience with MythTV annoyances

[Nedim Cholich]

On 6/11/06, drescher0110-mythtv at yahoo.com <drescher0110-mythtv at yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
> > > Again, not a Myth issue, there is a reason ext3 isn't one of the
> > > recommended file systems.
> >
> > That's fair. One does have to do some reading between the lines at
> > <URL:http://www.mythtv.org/docs/mythtv-HOWTO-24.html>, though, as I
> > didn't ahead of time as thoroughly as I should've.
> >
>
> My question is when were these recommeded file systems tested? And do
> these
> recommendations still apply? I have been a MythUser for 2 years and I
> remember this
> part of docs have not changed at all in that time. Was this for 2.4kernels or
> 2.6
> kernels? As 2 years ago 2.6 kernels were pretty new. And why is reiserfs
> not
> recommeded? We use reiserfs at work and we have over 5 TB of medical
> imaging data
> stored on reiserfs. Are we going to have sudden doom?


I'm no file system expert but the way I understand it reiserfs is suppose to
be good at handling a lot of smaller files. I use to use it for work (source
code=lots of small files) but never saw any real benefit so I switched back
to ext3.

Now JFS and XFS are suppose to be the opposite, good at handling
(extra)large files. The delete issue is the most obvious example. When I
first started playing with Mythtv I started with JFS but got burned pretty
bad (may have been my mistake), so now I use XFS. No problems so far.

Here are some links with more interesting info:
http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html
http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388/print
http://lwn.net/2001/0830/a/jfs-comparison.php3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20060614/b6590bc9/attachment.htm