On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:47:08 -0500 "Brett I. Holcomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Collins, I get the feeling that the Gentoo people are not very interested > in XFS and they don't want us using it - although this doc is better than > the previous one in which they discourged us from using it. I think they > should have the journaling warning on all the journalling systems or none. > For what it's worth I've used from the very first Gentoo box and it has > worked well - no loses. A couple times I've had to recover (due to X > locking up) I booted to the liveCD and ran xfs_check and xfs_repair if > necessary. What Gentoo failed to mention is that xfs_repair tells me if > there is pending information in the log and that I need to mount and then > umount the partition. I do that, the data is committed and xfs_repair > fixes it. > > Collins Richey wrote: > > > FYI. > > > >>From time to time we have threads about the use of various filesystems > >>(usually > > degrades rapidly to "my fs is better than your fs"). > > > > I just happened to be reviewing the current Gentoo Handbook - a work in > > progress, and I noted the following recommendation for XFS (a favorite of > > many on this list). > > > > 4.i. Creating Filesystems > > > > ... [ other fs descriptions] > > > > "XFS is a filesystem with metadata journaling that is fully supported > > under Gentoo Linux's xfs-sources kernel. It comes with a robust > > feature-set and is optimized for scalability. We only recommend using this > > filesystem on Linux systems with high-end SCSI and/or fibre channel > > storage and a uninterruptible power supply. Because XFS aggressively > > caches in-transit data in RAM, improperly designed programs (those that > > don't take proper precautions when writing files to disk and there are > > quite a few of them) can lose a good deal of data if the system goes down > > unexpectedly." > > > > ... [ other fs desciptions ] > > > > It is interesting that this recommendation is only present for XFS among > > the journaled filesystem choices. > > > Brett, Good to hear positive comments. On the other hand, data reported on gentoo usually has a factual basis, i.e. not crafted from whole cloth, so somebody must have had rather unusual experience(s) with the product. BTW, let me emphasize, I'm neither a fan of nor opposed to XFS. Gentoo tends to be fairly conservative with their recommendations (example: they do not recommend gentoo for a production server, which has certainly not stopped many users who contentedly run gentoo servers). The same may well apply to XFS which works well except under whatever unusual circumstances the documenters know. The other possibility, as Lonnie suggested, is that they based the recommendation on an early version of XFS. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area if you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://smtp.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
