Journalling slows everything down because it requires all writes (and reads)
to be serialized. This decreases SMP parallelism. The last thing Linux
needs is another slow SMP poor component. I think more is better, don't get
me wrong. I jsut didn't like seeing some folks go belly up and start
killing their internal projects (like ext3) just becuase XFS shows up on the
scene. Particularly since it was a patently blatant predatory move by SGI
based on pure politics -- so obvious. It's also just another unix file
system, and comes with all the limitations of Unix FS's.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: Andreas Bogk <andreas@andreas.org>
To: Jeff Merkey <jmerkey@timpanogas.com>
Cc: <mcai7et2@stud.umist.ac.uk>; <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: XFS and journalling filesystems
> "Jeff Merkey" <jmerkey@timpanogas.com> writes:
>
> > much of it they are really going to give you. Another Unix File system
> > (yawn yawn yawn) with journalling (which means it will be **SLOW**). I
> > would vote for the ext3 project to continue. It appears they were
reacting
>
> I'm using Linux for video applications. XFS has a very important
> feature for video: guaranteed bandwidth. Also, journalling slows down
> reading, but speeds up writing, which is again important for
> video. So, as long as ext3 is not there, I'll be very happy about XFS.
>
> Andreas
>
> --
> Reality is two's complement. See:
> ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/hakmem/hacks.html#item154
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/