On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 03:15:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Sonny Rao <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 10:35:43AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > All that being said, Linux's filesystems are looking increasingly crufty
> > > and we are getting to the time where we would benefit from a greenfield
> > > start-a-new-one.
> >
> > I'm curious about this comment; in what way are they _collectively_
> > looking crufty ?
>
> We seem to be lagging behind "the industry" in some areas - handling large
> devices, high bandwidth IO, sophisticated on-disk data structures, advanced
> manageability, etc.
Er, no. I'm not aware of many filesystems that are in the same
league as XFS on those first three specific points. It certainly
has "ondisk sophistication" very well covered, trust me. ;)
We are definately not lagging on handling large devices nor high
bandwidth I/O anyway - XFS serves up very close to the hardware
capabilities for high end hardware and it scales well. One could
come up with a different list of areas where Linux filesystems
might be lagging, but that list above ain't right.
> I mean, although ZFS is a rampant layering violation and we can do a lot of
> the things in there (without doing it all in the fs!) I don't think we can
> do all of it.
*nod*.
cheers.
--
Nathan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
