[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS vs. JFS

To: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS vs. JFS
From: Ric Tibbetts <ric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 15:25:24 -0700
Cc: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>, "Bernhard R. Erdmann" <be@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <> <200107011212.f61CCgM15038@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.1) Gecko/20010607
Steve Lord wrote:

At 12:04 1-7-2001 +0200, Bernhard R. Erdmann wrote:


how do you think about IBM's JFS for Linux version 1.0 released last

It's great because now we really _do_ have 3 journaling fs.
It gives people choice which is very important.

Each has it's own merits but here are some:

IBM has it's own userbase that has AIX with JFS. Don't know if the layout is compatible.

The JFS IBM released for Linux comes from the OS/2 version, not AIX. I
do not know if they are on disk compatible or not. Steve Best has given
lots of talks, at least some of them should be out on the net for people
to look at. I have not seen one of his talks for several months, so I
cannot comment on features etc of the 1.0 release.

The last I heard, AIX JFS , and Linux JFS are not disk compatible "yet". Linux JFS is a port from OS./2, and has no roots in AIX. I suspect that what we will see happen is that the "new" Linux JFS will be ported over to AIX with AIX v5, and then we'll see disk compatabilitiy. This is what I've heard from the IBM community.


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