Big? 800kb in compressed form. Unstable?? Look here: "At the D0 experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory we have a ~150 node cluster of desktop machines all using the SGI-patched kernel. Every large disk (>40Gb) or disk array in the cluster uses XFS including 4x640Gb disk servers and several 60-120Gb disks/arrays. Originally we chose reiserfs as our journalling filesystem, however, this was a disaster. We need to export these disks via NFS and this seemed perpetually broken in 2.4 series kernels. We switched to XFS and have been very happy. The only inconvenience is that it is not included in the standard kernel. The SGI guys are very prompt in their support of new kernels, but it is still an extra step which should not be necessary."
-- Bjarne On Sun, 2002-10-13 at 10:54, Danny Tholen wrote: > On Sunday 13 October 2002 10:16, Bjarne Thomsen wrote: > > Why is XFS the only journaling FS that is not > > included in the main 2.4 tree, considering > > that Mandrake, SuSE, Gentoo, Slackware, and > > JB Linux all have support for XFS? > Because, simply, XFS is a horrible big complex patch that possibly breaks many > things. And stock kernel should be as stable as possible. > > Danny >
