| To: | "Bernhard R. Erdmann" <be@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS vs. JFS |
| From: | Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 02 Jul 2001 08:25:28 +0200 |
| >received: | from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B45D57306; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:34:22 +0200 (CEST) |
| Cc: | Linux XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | Sauter AG, Basel |
| References: | <3B3EF5BD.7EE9AA5D@berdmann.de> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
"Bernhard R. Erdmann" schrieb: > > Hi, > > how do you think about IBM's JFS for Linux version 1.0 released last > friday? > http://oss.software.ibm.com/jfs/ > > Is it or can it be a competitor for XFS? > > The papers mention JFS only journaling metadata, not the data itself. > Does XFS also journal the data? At least JFS will give you another choice. That's a good thing. But for me it's not a choice because JFS lacks some features I like with XFS. To mention two of them: - RH-based Installer - Run's on Linux SoftRAID Simon |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | TAKE - ia64 + ACLs, extended attributes, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS marries JFS, Martin Spott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS vs. JFS, Ric Tibbetts |
| Next by Thread: | ACL_OTHER_OBJ?, Nikita Danilov |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |