Messages in this thread |  | | From | "Jeff Merkey" <> | | Subject | Re: XFS and journalling filesystems | | Date | Tue, 25 May 1999 09:36:43 -0600 |
| |
Andreas,
Journalling slows everything down because it requires all writes (and reads) to be serialized. This decreases SMP parallelism. The last thing Linux needs is another slow SMP poor component. I think more is better, don't get me wrong. I jsut didn't like seeing some folks go belly up and start killing their internal projects (like ext3) just becuase XFS shows up on the scene. Particularly since it was a patently blatant predatory move by SGI based on pure politics -- so obvious. It's also just another unix file system, and comes with all the limitations of Unix FS's.
Jeff
----- Original Message ----- From: Andreas Bogk <andreas@andreas.org> To: Jeff Merkey <jmerkey@timpanogas.com> Cc: <mcai7et2@stud.umist.ac.uk>; <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 8:57 AM Subject: Re: XFS and journalling filesystems
> "Jeff Merkey" <jmerkey@timpanogas.com> writes: > > > much of it they are really going to give you. Another Unix File system > > (yawn yawn yawn) with journalling (which means it will be **SLOW**). I > > would vote for the ext3 project to continue. It appears they were reacting > > I'm using Linux for video applications. XFS has a very important > feature for video: guaranteed bandwidth. Also, journalling slows down > reading, but speeds up writing, which is again important for > video. So, as long as ext3 is not there, I'll be very happy about XFS. > > Andreas > > -- > Reality is two's complement. See: > ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/hakmem/hacks.html#item154 >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |