Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 03:50:43 -0700 From: Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org> To: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> Cc: ccf@master.ndi.net, gordont@bluemtn.net, jkh@osd.bsdi.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: technical comparison Message-ID: <20010523035043.A77560@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200105220411.f4M4BDX101825@saturn.cs.uml.edu>; from acahalan@cs.uml.edu on Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:11:13AM -0400 References: <200105220411.f4M4BDX101825@saturn.cs.uml.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The proposed filesystem is most likely Reiserfs. This is a true > journalling filesystem with a radically non-traditional layout. > It is no problem to put millions of files in a single directory. > (actually, the all-in-one approach performs better than a tree) > > XFS and JFS are similarly capable, but Reiserfs is well tested > and part of the official Linux kernel. You can get the Reiserfs > team to support you too, in case you want to bypass the normal > filesystem interface for even better performance. It should be noted that simply because something is tested and a part of a release, it is not automatically wonderful. My last experiance with linux was in the 2.2 days, and ended with a lost root filesystem while attempting to access an msdosfs drive. From what I've read, mixing reiserfs and nfs is about as exciting as the stock market has been in the last few months. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010523035043.A77560>