On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Robert E. Raymond wrote: > On Tuesday 25 March 2003 07:38 am, Roger Oberholtzer wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 22:14:38 -0700 > > > > Andrew Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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> > > > > > > Here's another interesting read from Andrew Klaassen to the XFS list. > > > (ReiserFS not included in this one) > > > > Anyone care to comment on how difficult it is to install XFS on, say, a > > 2.4.13 kernel? Is it realistic to install it on a 2.4 series kernel? > > I thought there was a SxS on XFS?
yup, i wrote it, and continue to maintain it: http://sxs.sourceforge.net/sxs/administration/xfs.html > You need an XFS patched kernel, and you might want to upgrade to 2.4.20, now > that 2.4.13 is a year and a half old now. indeed. 2.4.13 is a bug ridden nightmare, and XFS has come a long way since then too. > Alternatively, use the 2.5.xx series. XFS support is built-in :D yea, but then he's really playing with 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
