xfs file system

[tritron]

I am using xfs file system but I get this crash. Is this error related to pogoplug 128mb of memory?
When I try to run xfs_repair I get error fatal error -- couldn't initialize XFS library how Isolve this. Is jfs better orshould I switch to ext4?

[ 4041.980000] c58be000: 58 46 53 42 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 1c ed 25 10 XFSB.. ........%.
[ 4041.990000] Filesystem "sda3": XFS internal error xfs_da_do_buf(2) at line 21 12 of file fs/xfs/xfs_da_btree.c. Caller 0xbf041c04
[ 4041.990000]
[ 4042.000000] [<c002e1fc>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xe0) from [<bf041b08>] (xfs_d a_do_buf.isra.8+0x634/0x6b8 [xfs])
[ 4042.000000] [<bf041b08>] (xfs_da_do_buf.isra.8+0x634/0x6b8 [xfs]) from [<bf04 1c04>] (xfs_da_read_buf+0x28/0x30 [xfs])
[ 4042.000000] [<bf041c04>] (xfs_da_read_buf+0x28/0x30 [xfs]) from [<bf047a74>] (xfs_dir2_leaf_getdents+0x300/0x94c [xfs])
[ 4042.000000] [<bf047a74>] (xfs_dir2_leaf_getdents+0x300/0x94c [xfs]) from [<bf 044470>] (xfs_readdir+0xe0/0xec [xfs])
[ 4042.000000] [<bf044470>] (xfs_readdir+0xe0/0xec [xfs]) from [<bf079498>] (xfs _file_readdir+0x40/0x50 [xfs])
[ 4042.000000] [<bf079498>] (xfs_file_readdir+0x40/0x50 [xfs]) from [<c00ae2e0>] (vfs_readdir+0x94/0xbc)
[ 4042.000000] [<c00ae2e0>] (vfs_readdir+0x94/0xbc) from [<c00ae414>] (sys_getde nts64+0x5c/0xb4)
[ 4042.000000] [<c00ae414>] (sys_getdents64+0x5c/0xb4) from [<c0028ee0>] (ret_fa st_syscall+0x0/0x2c)

[slycat]

I believe most installs call for an ext# fs. Namely 2 or 3.

Just double-checked the wikis of EVERY option.. each says to use ext2 (except Sheeva apparently and Pro/OXNAS either 2 or 3). Any reason why you are leaning towards xfs?

EDIT: Just saw it was for a third partition, my mistake.

[WarheadsSE]

This isn't for his primary drive, but /dev/sda3

Still, I wouldn't mind hearing why xfs ...?

[tritron]

So I switched to jfs and systems seems faster. I am using ext3 on mine primary partition. I have vdr movie server with 8TB of space all on lvm with xfs file system and all works fine. So I guess that xfs needs more memory than jfs. I have 2TB drive attached so my /dev/sda3 is large and files that I am hosting on that drive are from 5M mp3 500MB avi files some 1GB to 2GB software (iso). It seems that xfs jfs is better at storing larger files so I can store more files. hdparm showed that jfs was faster 20mb/s than xfs, I get 63 mb/s and samba uses less than 50% of cpu when I am moving files to hard drive.

[xenoxaos]

I would stick away from xfs on the oxnas boards. The xfs filesystem module from the kernel provided from Pogoplug is overly modified and doesn't build properly. So, for compatibility reasons, I would stick with ext.

[DePingus]

I just wanted to chime in on this thread with my experience these past 2 weeks with XFS on the DockStar.
You know...for science.

I also have a secondary 2TB 5400rpm HDD in an external enclosure connected via USB. I am using it for media storage and streaming video over samba. Many of those videos are in HD with large file sizes 6gb and up.

After a little bit of research I decided to give XFS a try, because supposedly it can easily handle the large file sizes. I never even gave RAM/CPU requirements a thought. At first everything seemed great. Using XFS I download at 28 MB/sec to a Windows7 desktop. Top shows smbd to be operating at around 60% CPU and using 2.9% RAM. Not bad.

But then I rebooted.

After the reboot, the XFS drive would not mount. It gave me some log errors and suggested I try using xfs_repair. When I tried repairing, xfs_repair complained that it didn't have enough RAM and that it would take a really long time to complete, then failed almost immediately. I took the XFS drive to a laptop running Arch and was able to successfully run "xfs_repair -L" to fix the issue. Then it happened again after another reboot. And again after a 3rd.

So right now I'm backing up all the stuff on that drive so that I can reformat it to another filesystem. I was considering JSF but I don't know if I want to keep experimenting. (Backing up a 2tb drive onto 4x300gb drives spread over 3 systems isn't much fun). Unless anyone has any other advice on how to handle those large files, I'll probably just go with ext3 and be done with it.

[WarheadsSE]

I've been using ext4 on all my large data storage partitions, without problems.

450GB -> 3TB

[tritron]

I use jfs file system with noatime and I get no issues