Re: HFS+ (MacOS) in contrast to EXT2 (Linux-i386)
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: HFS+ (MacOS) in contrast to EXT2 (Linux-i386)
- From: Andrew Sharp <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 06:03:55 -0700
- Message-id: <3BC4473B.5439CE12@netfall.com>
- References: <20010918133237.A11427@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> <B7CCCF21.71B5firstname.lastname@example.org> <20010918113735.A6861@mikef-linux.matchmail.com> <email@example.com>
Colin Walters wrote:
> Mike Fedyk <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Besides ext3, which other journaled FSes support data journaling?
> > I know not ReiserFS... I think IBM's JFS does. Can XFS?
> XFS doesn't support data journaling, and I don't think there are any
> plans to in the near future; the developers are focusing mainly on
The decision not to log data was made a long time ago, and has been
decided against in all major commercial journaling file systems that
I know of for interesting technical issues, namely that they think
their tests and theories show that data logging is a feature that
produces a slower file system that is less reliable, and also that
it makes certain other features damn near impossible, including
filesets, encryption, HFS and compression. 'Course if you don't
plan on implementing any of those features, and you don't plan on
making your file system code multithreaded, then maybe it's not a
bad idea. ~:^) I think there are some white papers on the sgi and
ibm web sites on this issue. Neither vxfs, jfs, nor xfs log data.
Vxfs and JFS have file sets, which are totally bitchin', especially
for very large server systems that are computin' 24x7, if you know
what I mean.