On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Yaacov Akiba Slama wrote:
>
> > So it seems that even if JFS is less complete than XFS (no ACL, quotas
> > for instance), and even if it is less robust (I don't know if it is, I
> It is not less complete nor less robust, it's a different technology and a
> totally different approach.
> Remember XFS was designed thinking to a kind of HW totally different from
> PC, and so was for jfs. But somehow JFS is a better choice if you
> do not have the last fastest CPU, and the last fastest scsi disk.
This is simply not true. I run xfs on three systems - none of which have
anything close to the latest cpu. Each system runs faster after
installing xfs. Since linux-kernel is not the place for advocacy I
suggest a comparison be for your particular setup to determine which is
best for you.
James Rich
james.rich@m.cc.utah.edu
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 30 2001 - 21:00:21 EST