On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Joyce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For anything approaching 1TB or larger, consider xfs over ext3. Fsck'ing a > large ext3 filesystem takes ages.
Why would you ever need to fsck a ext3 volume? I suspect that a full fsck of an xfs volume is just as slow as fscking a ext3 volume... If you were comparing ext2 and xfs, then I'd agree, but really, there is no real need to regularly perform a full fsck on ext3 volumes. -Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/