[rescue] Linux FSs

[Phil Stracchino]

Saquinn624 at aol.com wrote:
> All the recent talk about IRIX vs Linux (specifically the XFS part) got me 
> wondering about the various filesystems for Linux, and it doesn't look like 
> there's much recent information in the wild about how the various options compare 
> in real life (also I'm not quite technically into it enough to figure out some 
> of the bits).
> So: it looks like XFS is probably not the best option, so that seems to leave 
> JFS and possibly AdvFS in the running for high-performance filesystems (at 
> least until (and if) ZFS makes it into Linux).
> 
> What does the list think?

For my money, JFS is the way to go on Linux right now.  ext2/ext3 are
stablew but slow and antiquated; ReiserFS has always been of suspect
reliability, and has horribly high CPU utilization for delete
operations; XFS, as previously noted, is not fully supported on Linux.
The rest are pretty much bit players (so to speak).



-- 
  Phil Stracchino, CDK#2     DoD#299792458     ICBM: 43.5607, -71.355
  alaric at caerllewys.net   alaric at metrocast.net   phil at co.ordinate.org
         Renaissance Man, Unix ronin, Perl hacker, Free Stater
                 It's not the years, it's the mileage.