On 9/26/06, John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Damian Menscher wrote:
> [sorry for the mis-threading... I joined this list after this thread had
> run its course]
>
> One argument for a filesystem other than ext2/3 is that those have an
> 8TB limit.  There are currently raid arrays on the market that have a
> 12TB capacity.
>
> I suppose the RedHat response would be to run GFS?  But we only have one
> server, not a cluster.  And it seems overly-complex considering the
> existence of XFS.
>
> XFS has other advantages too:
>  - it's supported by other distros, so there's no vendor lock-in


There is especially no vendor lock-in with ext{2,3,4}, and someone from
RH has already stated RH doesn't wish to acquire the resources (people)
to support other filesystems, a position I understand well enough.

If you have a need for larger-than-8 Tb filesystems, express it via your
Red Hat support contact.


Heh.. I am still trying to figure out how to get 130 MB/s continuous
non-cached writing to 11 TB disks. I am not sure that they fix that
one.


--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

_______________________________________________
rhelv5-beta-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-beta-list

Reply via email to