--On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 15:59:52 +0000 Dan Bolser <dmb@mrc-dunn.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > ++ Joe Landman-- >> Hi Dan: >> >> If it is a chore to have them switch, then the hashing function is a >> much better choice. I am not so sure about trusting real data to >> Reiser, I have been (badly) burned by it in the past. > > I know Reiser and xfs are still very new. > > Anyone actively using xfs? > > I guess switch involves reformatting disks? Actually we have a large > storage space yet to come 'on line'. It might be a good chance to try xfs. Actually, xfs is new only in the sense that it has just made it into the stable linux kernel trees. As an old SGI admin, I've used it for about 5 years total, and about half that long on Linux. As you might suspect, I am quite fond of it. On my Linux systems, I use it for most partitions except for /boot (grub can handle xfs, but with lilo and multiple os use, xfs on a boot partition is a no-no). A couple caveats apply. First, you should always have your system on a ups of some kind if you use xfs. The aggressive caching is great, but a badly timed power cut can trash a filesystem ( It's never happened to me, but forewarned is forearmed). Also, to get the best performance, you need to do a little reading of the documentation for mkfs.xfs. The defaults tend to over-allocate internal filesystem data structures, which can slow things down. If there's anything more specific you want to know, please feel free to drop me a line. Andy