Timeline for What are the differences between ext4, ReiserFS, JFS, and XFS? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11 at 15:42 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Jan 13 at 15:08 | |||||
| Jul 9, 2023 at 5:57 | comment | added | iconoclast | The differences between file systems are NOT OPINION BASED. What kind of person thinks this? Someone who is unaware what "opinion" means, or someone who is simply a bully who likes to close questions because they have the power to do so. SE is a ghetto. | |
| Jul 9, 2023 at 4:34 | history | left closed in review | muru AdminBee αғsнιη | Original close reason(s) were not resolved | |
| S Jul 1, 2023 at 21:22 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jul 9, 2023 at 4:34 | |||||
| S Jul 1, 2023 at 21:22 | history | edited | iconoclast | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 66 characters in body; edited title Added to review |
| Feb 4, 2021 at 12:22 | history | closed | muru meuh Panki AdminBee Stephen Kitt | Opinion-based | |
| Feb 2, 2021 at 3:11 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 4, 2021 at 12:22 | |||||
| Oct 23, 2017 at 11:32 | comment | added | Richard Gomes | ZFS requires enterprise class hardware, in particular ECC RAM and UPS. Do not even consider ZFS in production if your hardware does not satisfy these requirements, otherwise you may lose the entire volume in case of a failed recover. | |
| Nov 20, 2013 at 12:08 | comment | added | Martin | ReiserFS and Reiser4 are dead. Look at BtrFS and ZFS for new functionality. | |
| May 29, 2013 at 11:30 | comment | added | Poma | Also take a look at new Btrfs, it's considered as future replacement for ext4 by many developers. | |
| Dec 28, 2012 at 18:34 | answer | added | MIrra | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 19, 2011 at 17:13 | history | edited | tshepang | CC BY-SA 2.5 | deleted 71 characters in body; edited title |
| Aug 18, 2010 at 16:09 | comment | added | wzzrd | There is no reason to take ZFS into account when talking about ext4 in the same thing, since that implies Linux and Linux will not have ZFS as a first-class filesystem any time soon. Thank you, Sun. Thank, you Oracle. | |
| Aug 12, 2010 at 13:02 | comment | added | Andriy Volkov | and ZFS please. Since everybody's crazy about it. | |
| Aug 12, 2010 at 9:15 | comment | added | tsvallender | Assuming Linux, you might also want to look at btrfs which is gaining traction lately, and is now an (unsupported) option on openSUSE. | |
| Aug 11, 2010 at 20:43 | vote | accept | Am1rr3zA | ||
| Aug 11, 2010 at 19:36 | answer | added | wzzrd | timeline score: 26 | |
| Aug 11, 2010 at 0:28 | history | edited | Sam Saffron | CC BY-SA 2.5 | edited body; edited title |
| Aug 10, 2010 at 23:22 | history | edited | Am1rr3zA | CC BY-SA 2.5 | added 8 characters in body; edited title |
| Aug 10, 2010 at 22:23 | comment | added | kbyrd | Two things: - It's JFS. - Do you just want a comparison of arbitrary filesystems? Or is your choice limited to these three? I'm asking because if you're thinking about ext3, you should really think about ext4. Most people also throw XFS in the mix when they consider JFS. AFAIK, ResierFS has an uncertain future. | |
| Aug 10, 2010 at 22:19 | history | asked | Am1rr3zA | CC BY-SA 2.5 |