| To: | Thomas King <kingttx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Questions for article |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:31:56 -0400 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <13033.143.166.226.57.1212526129.squirrel@tomslinux.homelinux.org> |
| References: | <13033.143.166.226.57.1212526129.squirrel@tomslinux.homelinux.org> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 03:48:49PM -0500, Thomas King wrote: > For the most part, XFS is used for massive filesystems (hundreds of petabytes) I think undreds of petabytes is not something we commonly see today :) hundreds of TB is more reasonable. > -Does/Will XFS support NFS v4.1? I suspect he means support for PNFS. PNFS is just like CXFS over sunrpc, so for anyone whoe cares adding an XFS layout driver shouldn't be a problem, and not actually require changes to the disk format or low-level XFS code. Note that I think pnfs a really good idea. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Questions for article, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: DMAPI JFS bug fixes, Niv Sardi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Questions for article, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Questions for article, Thomas King |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |