>Well, I'd point to one major factor with RHAT; they employ Stephen
>Tweedie, creator of ext3, and have been paying him to work on it for
>some time now. If they _didn't_ promote use of ext3, they would be
>very much vulnerable to the "won't eat their own dogfood" criticism.
>
>
>
True but frankly, they shouldn't. EXT3 has some serious issues. In fact
if you are running a stock RH kernel before 2.4.20 you can destroy your
PostgreSQL database with it.
Not to mention how slow it is ;)
>>XFS has been around a LONG time, and on Linux for a couple of years
>>now. Plus I believe it is the default FS for all of the really high
>>end stuff SGI is doing with Linux.
>>
>>
>
>Ah, but there is a bit of a 'problem' nonetheless; XFS is not
>'officially supported' as part of the Linux kernel until version 2.6,
>which is still pretty "bleeding edge."
>
That is not true see:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/1751
>Until 2.6 solidifies a bit
>more (aside: based on experiences with 2.6.0, "quite a lot more"), it
>is a "patchy" add-on to the 'stable' 2.4 kernel series.
>
>
>
Again see above :)
>Do the patches work? As far as I have heard, quite well indeed. But
>the fact of it not having been 'official' is a fair little bit of a
>downside.
>
>
What is official?
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>>I would (and do) trust XFS currently over ANY other journalled
>>option on Linux.
>>
>>
>
>I'm getting less and less inclined to trust ext3 or JFS, which "floats
>upwards" any other boats that are lingering around...
>
>
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL