On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 05:59:25PM -0800, Net Llama! wrote: > On 12/03/02 16:31, Jerry McBride wrote: > > > >That said, I've had no problems using it on either laptops, desktops or > >servers. > >The one big selling point is... you can always go back to ext2 when ever > >you > >wish, with nothing more than a single command. Try doing that with reiser, > >xfs, > >jffs, etc... > > I think the question is why i'd want to go back to ext2? I've never had > any need nor desire to revert to any other filesystem since using XFS. > the fact that you'd even have a need to do it with ext3 speaks volumes > about its lack of maturity.
Straw man. The capability to revert is a by-product of being able to convert (almost) seamlessly from ext2 to ext3. Which, I might add, you can't do with other filesystems. ext3 is a compatibility solution. To the degree that it propagates ext2's shortcomings, ext3 shares whatever immaturity ext2 had. Oh, and speaking of data corruption problems, XFS has them: 1.2 corrupts pages when the FS block size is less than the page size, because the buffer list would end up having multiple list heads. This is not in itself a problem but if a page is scribbled on via mmap() and via buffered writes from system calls (say, write()), the pages would not be written out. Kurt -- Fertility is hereditary. If your parents didn't have any children, neither will you. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
