On Sunday 13 April 2003 09:37, Bruce Marshall wrote:
One advantage of XFS is that it comes with an extensive set of additional 'tools' such as a program that will expand an XFS fs dynamically.
<snip>
None of the other journalling filesystems are close to being as "full-featured" and rely on external programs to perform these functions. I prefer tools native to the filesystem rather than the os or third party.
I remember "wowing" over the possibilty of using XFS on Linux 2 or 3 years ago when I first read it was being ported (I've always been an SGI freak), but RieserFS "got here first" for me, and I've been happily using RieserFS since the first version of SuSE that came with it (7.2 maybe, can't remember). I hear complaints about it once in a while but I've used it on several dozen computers, including some pretty loaded apache & mysql servers, with never a problem. Thinking about trying XFS again though, and I'm wondering: it always gets good ratings for large files. But is there anything *bad* about using it on smaller files (think a personal system or LAN server with typical office documents)? -- ---------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Wilson Cedar Creek Software http://www.cedarcreeksoftware.com