Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Server 22 Is Using The XFS File-System By Default

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fedora Server 22 Is Using The XFS File-System By Default

    Phoronix: Fedora Server 22 Is Using The XFS File-System By Default

    The server edition of Fedora 22 is using the XFS file-system by default rather than EXT4...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-Server-22-XFS

  • #2
    About time. I'm just surprised they didn't do this several releases ago, in prep for RHEL 7.

    Comment


    • #3
      I consider this a mistake, but not a surprising one since RHEL/CentOS already made the same mistake.

      XFS will silently corrupt your data by design. It internally XORs everything like RAID5, and if you interrupt it in the middle with a crash or hard reboot you get the XOR state not the data you expect. This will be even worse on desktops/laptops than on servers, because beta software is used more. It will also be more of an issue because laptops and desktops are less reliable hardware.

      I will be sticking with ext4. Maybe one day BTRFS will be stable enough, but doesn't seem like that will be any time soon.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by edgan View Post
        I consider this a mistake, but not a surprising one since RHEL/CentOS already made the same mistake.

        XFS will silently corrupt your data by design. It internally XORs everything like RAID5, and if you interrupt it in the middle with a crash or hard reboot you get the XOR state not the data you expect. This will be even worse on desktops/laptops than on servers, because beta software is used more. It will also be more of an issue because laptops and desktops are less reliable hardware.

        I will be sticking with ext4. Maybe one day BTRFS will be stable enough, but doesn't seem like that will be any time soon.
        Read the article again

        The article specifically mentions the server version.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by edgan View Post
          I consider this a mistake, but not a surprising one since RHEL/CentOS already made the same mistake.

          XFS will silently corrupt your data by design. It internally XORs everything like RAID5, and if you interrupt it in the middle with a crash or hard reboot you get the XOR state not the data you expect
          I would call this an urban myth. I recommend reading http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/638546/c63a545bf06860b1/

          Also, this change is only for Fedora Server.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Serafean View Post
            Read the article again

            The article specifically mentions the server version.
            You are right, but it is still a mistake for server edition too.

            Comment


            • #7
              Well, effing great.

              No file restore/undelete utility supports XFS and also XFS cannot be shrunk unlike ext4.

              Speaking frankly I find it hard to imagine a person designing a new FS which cannot be easily resized both ways. Or maybe I'm just used to rational things.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                I would call this an urban myth. I recommend reading http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/638546/c63a545bf06860b1/
                Your link is a special Subscriber only link. Which works, but I had not read this article, because I don't subscribe to LWN.

                It isn't an urban myth. It states this issue was fixed. It is unclear, but probably in 2007 or 2008.

                Another issue I would like to see an answer to is it has been stated that XFS is metadata-only journaling. Which means it only tries to preserve metadata consistency, not data consistency. So it is equivalent to ext4 write-back mode, where as ext4 defaults to ordered, and if you want extra protection you can switch to journal mode.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by edgan View Post
                  Your link is a special Subscriber only link. Which works, but I had not read this article, because I don't subscribe to LWN.

                  It isn't an urban myth. It states this issue was fixed. It is unclear, but probably in 2007 or 2008.
                  It is a link for non subscribers to read such articles. You are welcome to read them. If you are going to talk about old bugs (badly described as well) that have been fixed for years, ext4 had data loss bugs in the past as well. That rationale doesn't make any sense.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Cool, I had an XFS corruption just a few weeks ago. Something I never had with ext4. Very mature indeed.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X