From: Dave N <mutex1@yahoo.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: What's wrong with XFS?
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 05:13:12 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <936386.57179.qm@web59111.mail.re1.yahoo.com> (raw)
Hi,
Can someone enlighten me what the issue is with XFS? I've been hearing a lot of good things on the Net about XFS. How it's lightening fast, how it has features other file systems do not have (like GRIO, real time volumes, allocate on flush, etc), how it scales very well, etc... but what I didn't hear about is how fast XFS screws things up if something wrong happens. Because of the good things I heard about XFS, I too decided to try it out (been using Ext3 or ReiserFS here for most of the time). Now I'm very disappointed in XFS. I live in an area where power outages are common and I do not have an UPS here. I have a few computers all running on XFS and thought that XFS will give me similar data-integrity like Ext3 or ReiserFS. Now, for the past few weeks I've been experiencing "strange behavior" from XFS. One time, I was reading an article on the Net and had only my Firefox browser open. Then we had a power outage for a short period of time, and when I logged in again into
KDE, I was surprised to find out that all my desktop icons were messed up all over the place. The other time, again power outage, only this time I was working on a small text file. Booted up again only to find out that the file I was working on contained garbage and I had to start all over again.
I also heard that XFS depends heavily on the application side for its data-integrity. XFS "thinks" that the application will use the proper calls when writing to disk. What???? How is it the task of the application to ensure the safety of your files??? IMO, programs are there to provide the tools to be productive, NOT to ensure the data safety of your files, that's the task of the file system. Even MySQL provides me with better data-integrity here. If I'm doing some database transaction and the power fails, I can be pretty sure that *most* of the time, MySQL will be just fine next time I boot up.
Why oh why such a beautiful file system like XFS is so terrible at data-integrity? Look what Sun Microsystems did with their new ZFS file system... full atomicity, CRC checksumming and other features to ensure data-integrity... why can't XFS have such things?
Thanks for listening to my preaching here guys
Cheers!
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[[HTML alternate version deleted]]
next reply other threads:[~2007-01-08 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-08 13:13 Dave N [this message]
2007-01-08 14:41 ` What's wrong with XFS? Klaus Strebel
2007-01-08 14:45 ` Chris Wedgwood
2007-01-08 15:24 ` Klaus Strebel
2007-01-08 14:49 ` Olaf Fraczyk
2007-01-08 15:35 ` Joe Bacom
2007-01-08 14:50 ` Olaf Frączyk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=936386.57179.qm@web59111.mail.re1.yahoo.com \
--to=mutex1@yahoo.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox