Florin Andrei wrote:
John R Pierce wrote:
I've always avoided XFS because A) it wsan't supported natively in RHEL anyways, and B) I've heard far too many stories about catastrophic loss problems and day long FSCK sessions after power failures [1] or what have you
I've both heard about and experienced first-hand data loss (pretty severe actually, some incidents pretty recent) with XFS after power failure. It used to be great for performance (not so great now that Ext4 is on the rise), but reliability was never its strong point. The bias on this list is surprising and unjustified.
Yes. Used XFS for a mail queue and once lost 4000 emails thanks to XFS's aggressive caching after a power loss before barriers were introduced. However, XFS now supports barriers and so, so long as you do not use lvm or you use hardware raid with a bbu cache and thus not needing to use barriers, you are safe.
FWIW, I was at SGI when XFS for Linux was released, and I probably was among its first users. It was great back then, but now it's over-rated.
For sure it is the most complicated filesystem in Linux with the largest block code.