[Top] [All Lists]

Re: VALinux and Ext3

To: b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx, thebs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: VALinux and Ext3
From: Chip Salzenberg <chip@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:05:52 -0700
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3ADD9BBD.DECCC102@xxxxxxxx>; from b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 09:50:53AM -0400
References: <3ADD9BBD.DECCC102@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.17i
According to Bryan J. Smith:
> [Off-topic] As I said, VALinux seems to be squarely behind Ext3 for
> kernel 2.2 ...
>    http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=461437

[Disclaimer: I work for VA as kernel coordinator, but I don't speak
             for VA corporate.]

Well, we aren't really "behind" ext3, any more than we're "behind" any
other filesystem.  We certainly did choose to use ext3 in our NAS
product.  But given that [1] NAS has to have rock-solid NFS service,
[2] ext2 is the best-tested FS for NFS, and [3] ext3 is based on ext2,
it seemed a natural choice.

NAS isn't our only product, and even NAS could conceivably switch to
another filesystem, given cause.  We will evaluate the other journaled
filesystems as resources allow.  I'd like to set up a four-way test --
reiser, ext3, xfs, and jfs (IBM).  I'd like to use each of them for
[1] root, [2] /tmp, [3] other local usage, and [3] NFS export.
Considering RAID and other factors, it won't be an easy test to do;
don't hold your breath.  :-(

> Are they waiting on the Ext3 port to 2.4?  Or are they waiting on
> RedHat to adopt XFS?  Or are they evaluating XFS now?

We aren't neophiles ... at least, our managers aren't ... so we don't
deploy stuff just because it exists.  And if you check our kernel,
you'll find that it's essentially based on SuSE's kernel, not Red
Hat's.  We'll deploy whatever will serve our customers best.
Chip Salzenberg              - a.k.a. -             <chip@xxxxxxxxxxx>
 "We have no fuel on board, plus or minus 8 kilograms."  -- NEAR tech

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>