>> In my opinion the non-inclosure in the mainline kernel is the most
>> important reason not to use XFS (or any other FS). Which in turn
>> massively reduces the tester base. It is a shame, because for some
type
>> of applications it performs great, or better than anything else.
>
>
>On the other hand, filesystem corruption bugs are one of the worst type
>to suffer from. We absolutely don't want to include filesystems
>without at least a reasonable proven track record in the mainline
>kernel, and therefore encourage the various distributions to use them,
>incase any bugs do show up. Look how long a buffer overflow existed in
>Zlib unnoticed.
>
If enclosure in "major" distribuitons defines mainline for you, I have
to agree. Otherwise, how do you get "a proven track record in
mainline" without having it in the mainline kernel ? :-)
In any case, one could always mark XFS as "experimental" for some time.
>
>EXT2 is a very capable filesystem, and has *years* of proven
>reliability. That's why I'm not going to switch away from it for
>critical work any time soon.
sure, if you can live with the fsck time on your 200 GB (or bigger)
filesystem after the occasional crash.
Martin
-- Martin Knoblauch Senior System Architect MSC.software GmbH Am Moosfeld 13 D-81829 Muenchen, Germanye-mail: martin.knoblauch@mscsoftware.com http://www.mscsoftware.com Phone/Fax: +49-89-431987-189 / -7189 Mobile: +49-174-3069245
- 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 : Sun Sep 15 2002 - 22:00:29 EST