xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Now: Debian issues, WAS: XFS Filesystem not mounting

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Now: Debian issues, WAS: XFS Filesystem not mounting
From: pbrunnen <PBrunnen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:07:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-reply-to: <20100914223201.21c3bd0f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <29704010.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100914012151.GF411@dastard> <29705139.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <201009140740.14482@xxxxxx> <20100914082504.4109712d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <29708085.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <201009141603.24754@xxxxxx> <4C8F9E29.2000803@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <29710491.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C8FB8D6.6080603@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100914223201.21c3bd0f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> 
> I've used XFS only since 1996 and never looked back - I
> still actually miss those sturdy Origin 200 and 2000 :) I've set up
> about 2.5 PB of XFS filesystems in the past 5 years so I think it's
> quite a significant metric.
> 
> On the other hand I had some problems (fortunately nothing
> irremediable) on reiser, ext3 though I used them only sparsely.
> Obviously XFS is much more resilient to hardware glitches (I even
> recovered most of the data from a RAID-0 array with a failed drive).
> 
2.5PB... Wow... Those are some of the best points of why to use XFS.  Those
are really impressive...

Always was intrigued by the SGI equipment in the labs when I was at
University...  Never played with one though.  Checked out the specs of those
Origin boxes you mention.  That was some horsepower for the time.

-Cheers, Peter.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/XFS-Filesystem-not-mounting-tp29704010p29714426.html
Sent from the Xfs - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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