I just read about reiserfs being way faster than ext4. I am installing lubuntu 10.04 on a Pentium 4 3.06 ht 512ram. Ide 150g this distro will be use only for running a small counter strike source server the system already ave ubuntu on ext4 and win7. So my question are..
1- Can it install my distro on a reiserfs?
2- Is it better?
3- Is this different from other file system. I mean can it be logical?
I'm migrating my OpenSuse 11.3 (which was update from 11.2, 11.1 ........ ) to a new hard drive. My partitions were reiserfs and in the migration I'm "converting" them to ext4, the conversion process is simple and it works fine for all of them except the root one:
1) I create a new partition on the new hard disk (bigger than the original one)
2) I format it with ext4
3) I copy all the data with cp -a from the original partition to the new one
I already have all the partitions migrated to the second disk, then I have tried to do it with the root partition:
-I've booted with a system rescue CD and I've done !9 2) and 3) with no problems.
-I've edited and changed al entries in fstab and grub conf (menu.lst) to point the new partitions
-I've reinstalled grub and it seemed It will be no problems booting, but
It begins booting, the grub menu appears, It begins booting the kernel, but suddenly:
waiting for /dev/root to appear: OK
fsck.reiserfs -a /dev/sda2
........
mount -o ro,ad,user_xattr -t reiserfs /dev/root /root
and it fails, because sda2 is not reiserfs, but why does it try to mount it as reiserfs if I'm not saying anywhere it is reiserfs?
This is my fstab:
Code:
#/dev/disk/by-id/ata-ST3160211AS_6PT0V05Y-part2 / reiserfs acl,user_xattr 1 1
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD5000AADS-00S9B0_WD-WCAV91599607-part2 / ext4 acl,user_xattr 1 1
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD5000AADS-00S9B0_WD-WCAV91599607-part1 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD5000AADS-00S9B0_WD-WCAV91599607-part3 /home ext4 defaults 1 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-ST3500630A_9QG94AT1-part1 /mnt/backup auto noauto, defaults, users, exec .....
I've booted it also with SuperGrub2 disk and the same thing happened, so I think it's not a grub problem but I don't wknow why it tried to mount the root partition as reiserfs.
I have been having problems with filesystem corruption on my eeepc 1000H for a long time now. I have tried using different filesystems, kernels and distributions (arch, slackware) to no effect. I am starting to grow suspicious that this problem lies somewhere else, as I haven't seen anyone else having similar problems in such a variety of scenarios.
I have tried testing my ram using memtest86+, didn't come up with anything after a full run through. I also have tried using e2fsck -c to check for bad blocks, it finds none. I had a go at using smartctl but wasn't really sure what I was doing. I did a long test and it came up with nothing anyway.
This problem is in addition to the problems I've been having with my intel graphics chip and KMS. A lot of the time there are lockups when booting into X, which can only be gotten out of by a hard reset. This is sometimes what causes the original filesystem errors. I've stopped messing around with KMS for now to eliminate this but my current system in unbootable. I'm guessing my disk is wrecked but have as yet seen no definitive proof. Can anyone recommend anything that I should do?
I am currently on ext4 with a custom kernel 2.6.33-rc6 (the stock kernel shipping with slackware does not have the elantech extension for psmouse included). When I was using arch, I was just using the stock kernels.
The ext4 features are well listed in the Ext4 Howto.
Most of these features seem to be aimed at newer systems, having petabytes disk drives and handling huge files -- neither of which applies to my system.
Can a modest 3 year old system, having only two 500GB HDDs, used mostly for Android development using Eclipse (64-bit), benefit from choosing ext4 over ext3?
I got a problem booting ubuntu 10.4 RC but i solved it by replacing root partirion uuid in grub boot menu then I disapled totally uuid passing to linux from /etc/default/grub . but something else i noticed why grub choosed insmod=ext2 why not ext4 specially I use now ext4 .I tried by editing the grub boot menu replacing "insmod=ext2" by "insmod=ext4" it booted and the three lines error during booting that i used to see them science ubuntu 9.10 totally disappeared . really I dont understand can anybody explane for me.and if what i did was right ,can anybody tell me how to make grub always and permenantly detect ext4 as ext4 not as ext2.
View 6 Replies View RelatedI have a installation of Ubuntu on a flash drive that I just finished updating, etc. I noticed that it ran surprisingly slow during all my updates and software installations. I looked into it further and found out that for Flash Drive installations, it is recommended to use ext2 due to it's speed and lack of journaling (to limit the amount of writes to the disk).
I REALLY don't want to spend all the time and effort I have just spentt on reinstalling from scratch! I'd like to convert my partition filesystem from ReiserFS to ext2. How can I do this?
Can I backup all the information, do a new installation using the LiveCD, and restore the backup? What program can I use, and which directories do I need to backup?
I had 5.4 machine. Upgraded to 5.5 today via yum upgrade. All went fine. Rebooted. Wanted to convert root partition to ext4 (I have three partitions: /boot, / and swap). All of them on software RAID 1 (root is /dev/md2). I did the following for converting
yum install e4fsprogs
tune2fs -O extents,uninit_bg,dir_index /dev/md2
nano /etc/fstab # I indicated here that my /dev/md2 is of ext4
[code]....
I'm about to do a fresh install on a new computer, and I plan to dual boot with Arch Linux and Ubuntu. I've been doing some reading on Arch Linux, and apparently one of the little tweaks that many Arch users use to increase performance is to put /var/ on it's own partition using a file system that is good for quickly writing many small files, namely, ReiserFS. I was wondering if this would do any good for Ubuntu. Is Ubuntu's usage of /var similar to Arch's, and if so would using a similar partition setup provide any performance increase?
View 7 Replies View RelatedMy external HD where everything I backed up from my previous install will not mount. It shows up in lsusb, but when I do dmesg:
Code:
[20801.408614] usb 1-3: USB disconnect, address 36
[20804.190095] usb 1-3: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 38
[20804.343675] usb 1-3: string descriptor 0 malformed (err = -61), defaulting to 0x0409
[20804.345100] usb 1-3: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice
Also of note, my main filesystem is reiserfs, so there isn't a problem of not having reiser installed.
I'm sure I'll be installing Debian Squeeze again soon. Does anyone know if there would be any problems if I installed Debian on a ReiserFS journaling system rather then Ext3?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI follow the wiki about install the files needed in Centos5Plus! I am not able to format the drives with REISERFS. i tried the command mkf2.reiserfs and mkfs.reiserfs. I am able to format them with ext3.
I have been hearing that the guy who developed REISERFS is in jail for chopping up his wife and therefore no more support for it? it that true?
i want to create a new volume(reiserFS) on my free space but i can and palimpsest gives this error: Error creating file system: Cannot run mkfs: cannot spawn 'mkfs.reiserfs -q -l "websites" /dev/sda3': Failed to execute child process "mkfs.reiserfs" (No such file or directory)
does i must install any package?
I'm on a machine running OSX Leopard and Ubuntu 10.04: Ubuntu is installed on a ReiserFS partition, and it's data as well.Ubuntu and OSX are installed one for disk (disk0s* OSX - disk1s* Ubuntu)I'm aware of MacFUSE and I've already used it for sshFS but now I need it to mount a ReiserFS disk: do you know how to do that?
View 1 Replies View Relatedway of enabling support of reiserfs filesystem on centos 5.5 final
View 2 Replies View RelatedIt stores all my important stuff, as well as some music and movies.I use a second linux box in my living room to "stream" content via NFS or SAMBA share.The streaming tends to stop several times during playback, and needs to fill up its buffer again before continuing to play.I also have some Windows XP and 7 based computers that connect to this file server.I have noticed that directory listing is VERY slow, and there is a huge lag when I want to save/read a file from/to my home directory.
This is my setup:Ubuntu Server 10.10 64 bit (I have the same problem with 32bit ubuntu)
3 RAID5 arrays with 4 hard drives eachLVM on top of the 3 raid5 arrays.The Logical Volume i use is about 6.5TB, and I use the ReiserFS file systemThis LVM has grown over the years, and has had som replaced disks. So I have used the pvmove, and extend commands a bit.I have tried using IOTop and top to check if there is not enough resources available, but that doens't seem to be the problem.I haven't been able to find out why streaming over the network stops, but I know it is the server that causes the problem.Does ReiserFS have any performance problems with large logical volumes? Would changing to EXT4 or some other FS give any performance gain?
I have so far used reiserfs formatting both in my previous debian (sarge, etch and lenny) and opensuse (SLED10, opensuse-10.2,10.3 &11.3) and was very happy. When last month I installed debian squeeze I missed reiserfs (or did I miss noticing it?) Though Ext3 is giving me no trouble. I would love to have reiserfs. Is it now possible to change the filesystems without much trouble.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI installed the Squeeze with CD-ROM netinstall. My /home is in /dev/hda6, reiserfs format, and I want to preserve it, I didn't make backup, and there is not the reiserfs option in the partition editor of the netinstall, so that it would be formated the home, otherwise it is not used as home, and I can not even mount it. I try to edit /etc/fstab with the UUID of the device hda6 as home. I have just found reiserfs in http://packages.deb.at/squeeze/i386/rei ... i/download.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI am trying to install the reiserfs drivers to read/write to my external drive. But keep getting command not found. Although the system can get man pages for modprobe.
modprobe reiserfs
bash: modprobe: command not found
I also need to know how to add myself to the sudoers file. I have already tried visudo but this has not worked.
When I try to boot to OpenSUSE I get the following error during boot-up: unknown filesystem type 'reiserfs' could not mount root filesystem - exiting to /bin/sh$
This only started happening quite recently - before this I could boot to Linux quite happily.
I currently have the Ubuntu 32 bit 9.10 installed on my laptop. I wanted to install WinXP 64 bit using VirtualBox. My question is: will WinXP 64 bit run faster on Ubuntu 64 bit than it will run on Ubuntu 32 bit (my current OS)? Is the upgrade from Ubuntu 32 bit to Ubuntu 64 bit worth it for running a virtual Windows XP 64 bit?
View 3 Replies View Relatedaccording to this article i read, its definitely faster. this is what i read: Since 64-bit systems can process twice as many instructions per second as a comparable 32-bit system, 64-bit systems are definitely faster than their 32-bit counterparts. it was from this article link: [URL]... Is this true? I always thought it wouldnt make a difference, besides more memory addressing?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI put together a p4 that has 3 slots for ddr memory and the specs say maximum memory is 2 G at 400 Mhz or 3 G at 333 Mhz. Now, I assume this means that if you install a third memory stick, it will run at 333 Mhz. Is this right? Which would be better out of curiosity?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI am using Ubuntu 10.10 64-Bit Desktop Edition, and I am looking for a faster way to rip CDs, without having to resort to Windows. I try to rip a CD, but it takes 20+ minutes just to get the files copied, then another 5 or so minutes to burn the cd!I have a new SATA interface CD/DVD burner, so I know it is not the hardware.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI installed preload, I unchecked all startup applications, I uninstalled programs I wouldn't use. Any other tips for a faster Ubuntu?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI am considering installing Linux on my workstation to develop and run fortran codes much faster than windows. I wonder if there is significant speed difference between Linux distros. Especially between Redhat and Ubuntu or Debian. I havent used any Linux distro longer enough to have an idea about its speed while running long codes.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have windows xp professional installed and I have 256 MB RAM and 80 GB hard disk.I installed Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Desktop Edition alongside on windows on a formatted 12 GB C drive(windows on E drive).When I used linux it was very slow but my windows is running smoothly.How can I get normal and smooth speed on linux as I have it on windows.Will removing the windows speed up linux?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am currently backing up my data but find that it takes way to long to do a rsync, it takes forever to just find the differences and transfer them.Out of 3 separate rsyncs the main one that is slow is my www.skins.be mirror directory which is 41GB and has 392,200 files, sorted into multiple directories. Which grows by around 100 every couple days.I think that something that would be able to track changes by inotify time on directories will speed it up since Picasa sure finds the changes fast when I open it and it is tracking over 26,200 pictures. I just don't know of a backup solution that does that.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI need to find a fast way to copy a folder containing about 2 terabytes over my home network to another Ubuntu machine.In the past I have used RSYNC over ssh, but this is far too slow for this much data (probably the ssh encryption overhead slowing things down)I have looked at using SAMBA, but this seems geared for a mixed Linux/Windows network. Also I don't know if SAMBA will be appreciably faster.
View 4 Replies View RelatedOne of the most common tasks I perform is browsing for files. I have always wanted my file manager to be lightning fast. That is, I open it and it loads directories instantly. No waiting, just opening them right away. This remained always a wish, as in Windows and Ubuntu on a variety of machines I always see that it takes a little while for the program to load directories. I am not talking about folders with thousands of files or anything special. However, I have seen others who have Windows (XP in this case), and their Explorer opens right away. Browsing folders is very much instant.
Is there any way to achieve the same in Nautilus? The other computer is not very modern or super fast, at all.
I have a laptop with SSD drive which I hoped would speed up this process, but this is not the case. On both my laptop and desktop I often see the 'loading' symbol, and files often appear after the folder view has opened (they just appear all of a sudden). This happens with folders I rarely visit but also with folders I often open.
How are others' experiences? Can Nautilus be instant? Is this a configuration tweak or hardware issue?
i run ubuntu 10.04 on my old pc pentium 4, 500mb ram ,how can ido for make faster..
View 5 Replies View Related