Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 03:42:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 03:42:19 -0400 Received: from dns.vamo.orbitel.bg ([195.24.63.30]:16403 "EHLO dns.vamo.orbitel.bg") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 03:42:18 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 10:47:04 +0300 (EEST) From: Ivan Ivanov To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: XFS? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1346 Lines: 35 I think that you missed the main problem with all this new "great" filesystems. And the main problem is potential data loss in case of a crash. Only ext3 supports ordered or journal data mode. XFS and JFS are designed for large multiprocessor machines powered by UPS etc., where the risk of power fail, or some kind of tecnical problem is veri low. On the other side Linux works in much "risky" environment - old machines, assembled from "yellow" parts, unstable power suply and so on. With XFS every time when power fails while writing to file the entire file is lost. The joke is that it is normal according FAQ :) JFS has the same problem. With ReiserFS this happens sometimes, but much much rarely. May be v4 will solve this problem at all. The above three filesystems have problems with badblocks too. So the main problem is how usable is the filesystem. I mean if a company spends a few tousand $ to provide a "low risky" environment, then may be it will use AIX or IRIX, but not Linux. And if I am running a <$1000 "server" I will never use XFS/JFS. ----------------- Best Regards Ivan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/