| To: | Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Help... Everything moved to lost&found |
| From: | Juha Saarinen <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:28:34 +1200 (NZST) |
| Cc: | "JHamilton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <JHamilton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <4.3.2.7.2.20010709112339.034083d8@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Seth Mos wrote: > But in general XFS does not like 2.96 and you should avoid it for your > critical data. Feel free to use it on your test machines but avoid it for > production machines. Yes... but if you say that, you should try to explain why. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to pinpoint the change between -85 and -88 that made all the difference between a stable system, and one that suffered file system corruption very easily. It could be the newer CVS code as well, but I don't know for sure. -- Regards, Juha PGP fingerprint: B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502 10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544 |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Help... Everything moved to lost&found, Seth Mos |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS Crash with 2.4.6-pre9 (reproduceable), Deti Fliegl |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Help... Everything moved to lost&found, Seth Mos |
| Next by Thread: | XFS Crash with 2.4.6-pre9 (reproduceable), Deti Fliegl |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |