Because XFS is BETTER (Re: opinion on XFS)

[Steven Timm]

The only time I have seen ext2 file system corruption on our cluster
of > 400 machines, it has been due to broken hardware, namely
the Serverworks IDE chipset that doesn't play nice with some
classes of hard drives.  If there is fs corruption in ext2, the hardware
is the first place to point the finger at.

Steve Timm

------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven C. Timm (630) 840-8525  timm at fnal.gov  http://home.fnal.gov/~timm/
Fermilab Computing Division/Operating Systems Support
Scientific Computing Support Group--Computing Farms Operations

On Thu, 9 May 2002, Mark Hahn wrote:

> > I don't think it would be fair to say "ext2 is good because lots of red hat
> > users use it" without ever having experienced XFS. I'll underline that.
>
> that's stupid.  whether I've experienced XFS has absolutely no bearing
> on the issue here, which is your insinuation that ext2/3 is a problem.
>
> the fact is that ext2/3 works without complaint in at least 100x as
> many installations as any other Linux FS.  probably more like 1000x.
>
> please: does anyone have any factual comparison to offer?  performance?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
>