Re: Status of XFS

To:	"Jan H. Schrewe" <jschrewe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: Status of XFS
From:	"Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	17 Feb 2001 11:06:14 -0500
Cc:	xfs-liste <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to:	<3A8D9A5A.62778092@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization:	Linuxcare, Inc.
References:	<3A8D9A5A.62778092@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Canyonlands)

>>>>> "Jan" == Jan H Schrewe <jschrewe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Jan,

Jan> The other reason is that I didn't have enough time yet to test
Jan> the stability of XFS.

Well.  If I were you I wouldn't put anything into production without
testing it first.


Jan> So would you ( the developers and testers of XFS ) think that I
Jan> can run a server ( without watchdog ) that I don't have physical
Jan> access to using raid.

RAID0 is fine.  We're still working on fixing the problems with RAID5.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen, Principal Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
mkp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, http://www.linuxcare.com/
SGI XFS for Linux Developer, http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Status of XFS, Jan H. Schrewe Re: Status of XFS, Martin K. Petersen <=

Previous by Date:	Re: IDE DVD problem, Matthew Geier
Next by Date:	mysterious dbench results, Thomas Graichen
Previous by Thread:	Status of XFS, Jan H. Schrewe
Next by Thread:	SGI-XFS-RedHat7.0 ISO, Michael Burger
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]