From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 7 21:10:04 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9817D106564A for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 21:10:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD0468FC0A for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 21:10:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q77L9xWN001663; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 23:09:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id q77L9x7x001660; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 23:09:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 23:09:59 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Marco Muskus In-Reply-To: <5021641E.4030206@une.net.co> Message-ID: References: <793d6519ca3648de7634faff1829b9f7@remailer.privacy.at> <5021641E.4030206@une.net.co> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 07 Aug 2012 23:10:00 +0200 (CEST) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, "Anonymous Remailer \(austria\)" Subject: Re: compare zfs xfs and jfs o X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 21:10:04 -0000 > > English is not my native language, so i can make mistakes. ZFS is the way to > go if you need consistency + speed on a NFS server/service. Of course "ZFS doesn't need fsck". Until it fails.