[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: For this weeks meeting agenda...



On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 09:00 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> The official answer for RHEL is here: 
> http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_80_5737.shtm

And while it is applicable to ReiserFS and JFS, it has _not_ been
applicable to XFS.  There have been numerous points during the 2.4
kernel where XFS was _better_ than Ext3 in support areas Red Hat sorely
needed -- from quotas to ACLs to (and still today) filesystem backup
(especially on-line).

This answer is oblivious to reality on XFS.  I've read the same comments
again and again -- others have done the same -- and everytime it's FUD.
People making the comments are actually unfamiliar with all the issues
solved by XFS.

Again, that viewpoint _is_ applicable to ReiserFS and JFS.  As a
proponent of Ext3 myself, I _do_ advocate why Red Hat does not support
ReiserFS and JFS.  But that advocacy _falls_flat_ when it comes to XFS.
Anyone who knows the history of XFS' development and release on Linux
knows this.

It's a _total_joke_ in the XFS group when Fedora/Red Hat come back and
say "oh, there's nothing XFS does that Ext3 doesn't do" and there are
all these "exceptions" they end up agreeing to -- such as the lack of so
many "standard" on-line user-space tools in traditional UNIX filesystems
that XFS has (since day 1 on Linux), the varying EA support and history
of quota support, the removal on relying on the LVM2/DM stack to solve
so many things (such as the lack of on-line user-space tools) which
introduce more race conditions, etc...

That's what I'm talking about -- key enterprise features that are
_expected_ in a multi-TB UNIX filesystem.  Which forces us to send our
clients to Solaris, instead of Fedora Core or Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

> Again, You should be specific about what you consider FUD in the Fedora 
> Myths page. Avoid long rants.

I've got plenty of specifics, and I've tried to address them here, as
well as in posts before.  But apparently you don't want to read what you
consider a "long rant."  That's just sad, because it is _not_ a "long
rant."

> If anyone is willing to step up and maintain XFS or any other filesystem
> for that matter in Fedora, it can be send to the fedora development
> list.

Try SGI and the XFS team.  Unfortunately, it takes some level of "formal
engagement" from Red Hat/Fedora kernel developers too.  That hasn't
happened from what I've seen over 4 years and, sadly enough, it's in Red
Hat's own, best interest.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith     b j smith ieee org     http://thebs413.blogspot.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The best things in life are NOT free - which is why life is easiest if
you save all the bills until you can share them with the perfect woman


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]