[Novalug] Recommendation: USB Large harddrives 400G(and up) What is a good filesystem to use?

[DonJr]

On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 14:16 -0500, Pete Nuwayser wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2008 2:15 AM, DonJr <djr1952 at hotpop.com> wrote:
> > I just got a USB connected hard drive, says "500G" on the box. (but)
> >  Plugged it in and Gnome(i guess) mounted it at "/media/My Data".
> >  {-:Where has the fun(*) of connecting a new device gone to? :-}
> >
> > What would be a good format to use for the filesystem on it?
> >   (The pre formatted one of FAT-32 is to limited, for my needs.)
> 
> My strategy would be to set the whole thing up as one LVM partition,
> create one volume group, create various logical partitions using
> reiserfs, ext3 and xfs, and then play with the resizing capabilities
> of each.

Doesn't fit with my current long term plan of usage.
  Archive space - for higher access archives.
    {-: Well aged stable ones will still go to dvd/cd :-}

  Short term Backup and/or recovery type space.
   {-: This is where most of those BIGGER files will come from :-}

  Also some place to put a bunch of HISTORY type data from projects I
work with as time is available,

> xfs is generally recommended over reiser and ext3 when your files are
> super-big (100G or more?), but it still works fine for general use and
> you may like the tools better.

Mostly bunches of small files and then some then that odd set with ever
growing {currently at} one(1) to three Gig in sizes.
  Currently the later get DELETED fast or put on DVD+-RW's
   {-: and then mostly somehow lost if not needed for a while. :-}

> from a recovery time perspective, I've found xfs recovers from
> fs/system crashes the fastest, followed by ext3 and reiserfs v3.
> 
> if you're moving this drive from one distro to another, ext3 is going
> to be the best-supported IMO.

That why ext3 was my first choice and currently what I setting up to
work/test my plan with.

> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/extendlv.html

I've all but TOTALLY uninstalled LVM(Logical Volume Manager) and
"cluster support" on every thing that I currently run.
  These sub-systems may be fine on newer hardware,
  but can be in compatible with older hardware in strange ways.

  Plus I don't like the idea of another {-: mostly useless IMHO :-}
layer between me and the data storage level of the disks themselves.

> have fun!

I plan to

-- 
 DonJr