jd@commandprompt.com ("Joshua D. Drake") writes:
>>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 ;)
I'm not defending ext3's merits; just the clear reason why RHAT uses
it :-).
>>>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
Well, I just downloaded 2.4.24 this week, and I don't see XFS included
in it. I see ReiserFS, ext3, and JFS, but not XFS.
>>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?
"Is it included in the kernel sources hosted at ftp.kernel.org?"
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="libertyrms.info" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;;
<http://dev6.int.libertyrms.com/>
Christopher Browne
(416) 646 3304 x124 (land)