On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 12:48 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote: > Hello dear JFS-developers, > > first of all thanks for the nice journaling filesystem. In my current > test (home-user alike, bonnie+mutt using for testing) jfs works pretty > good on top of dm-crypt, with much lesser cpu-usage than any other > linux-filesystem. > > But I have some questions: > > 1. Is it wanted, that the jfs-journal is recovered by fsck.jfs and not > by the kernel module? XFS, Reiser and ext3 in contrast > 'repair' themself, when getting mounted.
The design for this goes back to the original JFS implementation on AIX, and there hasn't been a compelling reason to change it. There has been a trend to move function from the kernel to user-space when possible, rather than the other way around. > [mutt] > 2. When using mutt with reiser or xfs, it reacts differently when I have > a mailbox opened: With jfs new messages are _not_ automatically shown. > With reiser or xfs, mutt seems to get notified, when the current > directory (Maildir/new) gets a new mail. > > Is that a problem of > a) dnotify > b) inotify > c) mutt? I don't know about this. jfs doesn't do anything special to support dnotify or inodify. They are implemented in the vfs. There may be something that jfs is failing to do that I'm not aware of. This is going to take some investigation. I will put it on my todo list, but would appreciate it if anyone out there wants to look into this. > Thanks for help in advance, > > Nico Thanks, Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
