From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:59:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from evaldomino.Falconstor.com (mail1.falconstor.com [216.223.47.230]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l2FEx26p010004 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:59:03 -0700 Message-ID: <45F95B21.9040603@falconstor.com> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:41:37 -0400 From: "Geir A. Myrestrand" Reply-To: geir.myrestrand@falconstor.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Questions about XFS References: <200703131440.56678.clflush@chello.be> <1173890016.20671.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <45F8CAEA.3050408@list.rakugaki.org> <200703151007.32630.clflush@chello.be> In-Reply-To: <200703151007.32630.clflush@chello.be> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: xfs@oss.sgi.com clflush wrote: > On the one hand you have the old Ext3 FS which doesn't perform very well in > many areas but IMO is a lot safer to work on (doesn't loose data that easily > compared to XFS - and I'm talking from experience here because I use both > file systems and I lost much more on the XFS system than on the Ext3 one) and > on the other hand you have this excellent XFS file system with its clean > layout and awesome performance + fancy features like GRIO, extents, allocate > on flush, real time volumes, etc *but* is not "safe" enough to work with if > you have unreliable hardware and/or a lot of power outage issues - I've > never lost data on Ext3 during a power outage but already lost 2 times data > on XFS You *always* use a UPS when you use XFS. XFS does not prevent power outages [yet]... > Just my $0.02 Save them for a UPS. ;-) -- Geir A. Myrestrand