Re: Opinions XFS
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 04:29:43PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 09:55:28AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:
On Aug 4, 2007, at 2:42 AM, Ron Johnson wrote:
I'd have to modify that. Instead of NIH, my worry is that since XFS
was designed for a different kernel, it's been "shimmed" into Linux
and so doesn't integrate as well as ext2/3 and ReiserFS. Same
concern with jfs.
I suppose that's a valid concern, but in the absence of any evidence
of problems caused by it I can't say I'm going to lose any sleep. :)
Given that SGI boxes now use Linux and have dropped Irix but still use
XFS, I think it pretty likely that they have done a good job of ensuring
that Linux's XFS is up to snuff.
IBM started JFS version 1 with AIX, then ported it to OS/2 and added
features to make it version 2, then ported it back to AIX where it is
the standard FS. They got Linux working on their newer Power servers to
meet customer demand and ported JFS to linux so that they had a common
filesystem irrespective of OS.
In both cases, the porting was done or directed by the origionator of the
filesystem for reasons that impact their bottom line. To some extent
their reputations are on the line with their filesystems. As they are
right now, I would trust them both equally well. They each have their
stronger points that make one more suitable than the other for certain
uses of the filesystem.
I would too, until I found out JFS has no maintainer.
Yikes. The jfsutils copyright and README.Debian are internally dated in
2001 as if they are old packages. However, the changelog.Debian.gz and
changelog.gz are June, 2006. xfsprogs have more recent changes. Stefan
Hornburg is listed as "responsible for this Debian package".
What exactly do you mean that JFS has no maintainer.
It has a maintainer, but he cannot work on it full-time:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:11:06 -0500
From: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bonnie++ benchmarks for ext2,ext3,ext4,jfs,reiserfs,xfs,
zfs on software raid 5
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 10:29 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
Overall JFS seems the fastest but reviewing the mailing list for JFS it
seems like there a lot of problems, especially when people who use JFS >
1
year, their speed goes to 5 MiB/s over time and the defragfs tool has
been
removed(?) from the source/Makefile and on Google it says not to use it
due to corruption.
The defragfs tool was an unported holdover from OS/2, which is why it
was removed. There never was a working Linux version. I have some
ideas to improve jfs allocation to avoid fragmentation problems, but jfs
isn't my full-time job anymore, so I can't promise anything. I'm not
sure about the corruption claims. I'd like to hear some specifics on
that.
Anyway, for enterprise use, I couldn't recommend jfs, since there is no
full-time maintainer.
Thanks,
Shaggy
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
Reply to: