On 28/07/14 18:45, ToddAndMargo wrote: > On 07/28/2014 06:37 AM, Brent L. Bates wrote: >> At my previous job, I used the XFS file system almost >> exclusively. I only used ext[2-3], if I had no other choice and I >> usually worked to get them changed to XFS, if at all possible. I >> started using XFS when it first came out for SGI's, probably 20 years >> ago.. I also used xfsdump/xfsrestore to tape. When we switched to >> LINUX, I also used XFS there as well. XFS and it's utilities are >> VASTLY superior to ext[2-4] and dump/restore. XFS is better, faster, >> HUGELY more reliable, and far more robust tha ext[2-4]. I've seen XFS >> survive repeated system crashes and hardware failures and still be >> able to get my data off of it. >> >> restore doesn't care what file system you restore to. All it >> cares about is the source. You should be able to take your old dumps >> and restore them to XFS file systems. Once on your new XFS file >> systems, use xfsdump/xfsrestore to create new backups. >> > > Hi Brent, > > Awesome! Thank you! > > So if I was happy with ext4, I should be delirious > with XFS.
XFS: the filesystem of the future (Jan, 2012) <https://lwn.net/Articles/476263/> It's a bit dated, but didn't find anything else quickly. The core message seems to still be relevant. David S.
