Re: C.P.U. suggestions.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Karl Schmidt wrote:
> Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
>
> >
> >I had great success with JFS except that I switch away from it when told
> >by the maintainer that IBM didn't recommend using it anymore.
>
> Could that be that they want you to use something they make that you have
> to pay for? IBM isn't supporting it, but it is supported by the kernel team
> - battle hardened and completely stable. I've had less trouble with jfs
> than ext3.
No. The email is in the debian-user archives. It was in one of those
"which fs is best" threads that come up from time to time. In the midst
of that thread, I received a private email from the jfsutils maintainer
who forwarded me an email he received from the one person IBM has
remaining to support JFS in Linux. IBM has cut the team from a few
full-time to one half-time assignment. It is IBM's official positition
that they don't recommend JFS on Linux for new projects. Note that the
kernel team aren't the ones who have to maintain the tools, and its the
tools that have to do the fscking.
The only problem I had with JFS was what I have with all
metadata-journal-only: I don't have a UPS and some files would go
missing.
Doug.
Reply to: