xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ext3 + xfs + jfs + reiser

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: ext3 + xfs + jfs + reiser
From: Hristo Grigorov <Hristo.Grigorov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:07:32 +0300
In-reply-to: <3BD45AAB.2D75ACAC@illusionary.com>
References: <20011022122106.A12279@bistro.marx> <1003771829.13566.38.camel@stout.americas.sgi.com> <3BD45AAB.2D75ACAC@illusionary.com>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Monday 22 October 2001 20:43, Derek Glidden wrote:
> Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > Dunno about a single patch, but the latest Mandrake has all of those
> > filesystems co-existing.
>
> On a slight tangent, I was at an expo last week and a SuSE guy was also
> there.  A brief discussion popped up about journaling filesystems and we
> determined that XFS was *not* going to be in SuSE 7.3 while Reiser, ext3
> and JFS were.  His explanation was that XFS was not stable enough but
> had no more technical information.
>
> Can any SuSE guys around here comment more on that?
>
> (My suspicions are really less that it's unstable and more that it
> touches pretty deeply into the rest of the VFS layer that made them
> unhappy and not want to use it for whatever reason.  Some of the same
> stuff I've seen Alan Cox mention here.)
>

Weird... Both SuSe and RedHat pretend to aim enterprise market and at the 
same time they don't want to support _real_ enterprise filesystems like XFS 
and JFS. I would bet that most mission critical servers out there run either 
JFS or XFS as they are long-time tested, well documented and has some 
kind of official support. The only idea that comes to my mind is that they 
don't like the idea that commercial companies controls the sources for those 
FS even that they are opened to the public community. Not-stable is obviously 
not the reason here... Kudos for Mandrake anyway! :)

-- 
Regards, Hristo.


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