Hi.
I just thought I'd point to an article in OSNews with interviews done with
Steve Best of IBM (JFS), Hans Reiser of Namesys (ReiserFS), and our very
own Nathan Scott for XFS.
<http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=69>
I'm pretty happy with all three interviews, but am most pleased by the
fact that instead of bashing each other like what we see with some other
evil empires out there, these three "competitors" are helping each other
out, sharing knowledge, and inevitably leading to infinitely more robust
filesystems with Linux 2.4 now, and 2.6 in the near future, and beyond.
Well, what I read was sorta good except one line that I didn't like.
How old is XFS and how old is ReiserFS?
And now read this:
quote Hans Reiser:
" If you want the most widely tested journaling file system for use with
"typical" file sizes, then use ReiserFS. If you want to stream
multi-media data for Hollywood style applications, or use ACLs now
rather than wait for Reiser4, you might want to use XFS."
Is it only me or is that below the belt?
"Hollywood style applications" ?
// Stefan
|