J Sloan wrote: > [...] > Sorry, but that just sounds too bizarre to me - we've been using > reiserfs in our data center for years, since it's the default filesystem > on suse linux. It's been rock solid here, and is also the fastest > journaling filesystem we've found.
Sorry, I am not interested in a thread about filesystems. Darryl asked the question and I answered it. If ReiserFS works for you very well, that's fine, I have no problems with that statement. We have done a lot of testing quite some time ago and made bad experiences which is the reason why we decided against ReiserFS - calling that bizarre just because it doesn't conform to your own experiences is not very nice. In our situation with big files and big filesystems, xfs does now a very good job, so why should we change? > I understand that reiserfs > maintenance going forward may slow down, so we'll have to eventually > settle on a different filesystem, but there's no reason to suddenly > change all of our stable systems on a political whim. Nobody said you should - where did you get that idea from? Darryl asked why we don't use ReiserFS and I answered exactly that question. I don't really care what you do and what filesystem you use - everybody has the choice and that's a good thing. If you're happy with ReiserFS, fine! We're happy with xfs. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
