On 17 Apr 2001 21:11:54 -0400, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Re: Installation of xfs in RH 7.1 Stop this JFS holy war before
> it starts!
That's no holy war. I think we actually agree on most issues.
> Florin Andrei wrote:
> > Ext3 is really lame. It's just Ext2 with some journalizing
> > stuff plugged into. Think of it as "proof-of-concept"
> > software. But nothing more. Period.
>
> Unfortunately it is only available for 2.2. Plus Ext3 is still Ext2
> with all its limitations. So no, Ext3 is NOT "the future" of JFS'
> for Linux. But, again, it worked _yesterday_ for 2.2 kernels. You
That's what i was saying. Ext3 is a nice "tour de force", but let's move
on to some other stuff, now that 2.4 is alive and kicking. ;-)
> ReiserFS is a new FS, on any OS, period. Depending on who I've
> talked to, and the limited time I have run it, ReiserFS is solid, or
> deadly. Most people running ReiserFS in the stock 2.4.1+ kernels
> have had good experiences, _unless_ they use kNFSd. I've heard of
> issues even with the kNFSd patches added. As such, I've never run
I agree.
> XFS is a proven, true 64-bit JFS on Irix. Now ported to Linux, XFS
> has the riches feature set of any major JFS project for Linux (at
That's true, too.
The XFS project evolved much faster to a stable state, mainly because
the FS itself was already rock solid. Only the Linux port needed some
tweaks.
But with ReiserFS, the FS itself is new and evolving, hence the
stability issues (and, i'm afraid, we will still see some of these
issues in the future, while i expect XFS to become "really stable" and
stay there). However, i must say, ReiserFS worked for me always. :-) And
it seems to be the best choice for a nice Squid box ;-) (at least for
the proxy cache partitions)
So, i think i would use XFS most of the time, except for the proxy
server.
--
Florin Andrei
"Bloat is not about being big. Bloat is about being slow and stupid and not
realizing that it's because of design mistakes." - Linus Torvalds
|