ext3 / reiserfs handles them more effceitnly than XFS and/or JFS, with ext3 being ahead of
reiserfs. With the advant of ext3, I am seeing less and less reiserfs users and more and more ext3.
If you are running large databases, production machines, or anything considered VIP, I would use
XFS/JFS. For the casual user/home user who is interested in at least having some sort of
journal file system, I would go with ext3.
Most of the data corruption I have seen lately, has been from NEWER IDE hard drives failing.
I think they must have children younger than 8 assembling them in a third world country. So NO
journal file system will protect you from that, only good backups .....
Net Llama! wrote:
<SNIP>
But is XFS ready for prime time?? or should I wait to make any big changes till kernel 2.6.
<SNIP>
The debate over ext3 vs. XFS has started to appear akin to a religious war, as some folks on this list swear by ext3, others love XFS (myself
amen !!!!
And 8.0 IS still no exception. FWIW, SuSe 8.1 is about equal to RedHacks 8.0 release.amongst them). All i can note is that there are quite a few who have reported problems with ext3, yet i'm not aware of anyone experiencing problems with XFS. If you're concerned over software being ready for primetime, then you have no business running RH8, since its hardly what most folks would consider a stable release. Redhat's .0 releases have always been notoriously buggy.
<SNIP>
--
Ben Duncan Phone (601)-355-2574 Fax (601)-355-2573 Cell (601)-946-1220
Business Network Solutions
336 Elton Road Jackson MS, 39212
"Software is like Sex, it is better when it's free" - Linus Torvalds
_______________________________________________
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
