On 12/03/02 16:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SuSE, too (I see Aaron pointed this out, too). You might push ext3 harder than I do. I have nothing against XFS; it's a superior solution. I'm hereThe sad thing is that i didn't push ext3 any harder than XFS. Ignoring bugs & instabilities, ext3 still requires a stupid time-consuming fsck. Yea, sure, the chances of losing data is significantly reduced, but if i wanted to wait an hour for my terrabyte array to fix itself, i'd go back to 1998.
at ext3, though, it ain't broken, so I don't feel the need to fix it.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
L. Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo: http://netllama.ipfox.com
4:45pm up 2 days, 2:13, 1 user, load average: 0.13, 0.23, 0.16
_______________________________________________
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
