On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Andrew Mathews wrote: > Net Llama! wrote: > > Last week there was a thread on the Linux kernel mailng list comparing > > XFS, reiserFS & ext3: > > http://kt.zork.net/kernel-traffic/latest.html#13 > > > > looks like ext3 came in last, resierFS first, XFS in the middle. > > > <shameless plug> > Linux on XFS is now our standard deployment model, replacing RS/6000 > hardware and AIX operating systems. Ext3 just couldn't cut it in the > stability tests, and was way behind in performance and features. > </shameless plug>
same here. i just wanted to try & be objective, and let the data speak for itself. reiserfs sounds like its shaping up to be an excellent choice for a home user. > Here's another interesting read from Andrew Klaassen to the XFS list. > (ReiserFS not included in this one) > > Well... not until I threw a fork bomb at it, anyway. <smirk> > But even then, it kept on chuggin' till the load average was > somewhere over 900. 900??? eeek. i'm surprised it didn't catch on fire :) -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lonni J Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo http://netllama.ipfox.com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
