xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS Support in RHEL Server 6.4 x86_64

To: Michael Weissenbacher <mw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS Support in RHEL Server 6.4 x86_64
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:50:00 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5177B899.4000707@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <5177B899.4000707@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
On 4/24/13 5:48 AM, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
> Hi List!
> I was under the impression that XFS was officially supported by Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux.
> 
> During the installation i noticed that Anaconda wouldn't allow XFS as
> root file system. Well, that's not a big problem for me. But after
> installation i realized that they don't even include xfsprogs so that i
> could do mkfs.xfs. Well, also not a big problem, i used the latest
> tarball and compiled them myself.

Which gets you into unsupported land I'm afraid.  As others mentioned,
it's an add-on product in RHEL6, available w/ a separate subscription.
That subscription comes with official RHEL xfsprogs, and support.

> But the big question now is: can anybody actually recommend using XFS on
> stock RHEL? It does feel like being just a stepchild there. On the other
> hand there seem be be quite a number of patches that were backported for
> Red Hat's kernel and it does use delaylog by default (which IIRC wasn't
> the default with a stock 2.6.32 Kernel).

As Ric said, it's very much *not* a stepchild.  :)

-Eric
 
> tia,
> Michael
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
> 

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