> 4. Journaled filesystem. While we can debate the merits of speed and > data integrety of journalling vs. softupdates, the simple fact remains > that softupdates still requires a fsck run on recovery, and the > multi-terabyte filesystems that are possible these days make fsck a very > long and unpleasant experience, even with bg-fsck. There was work at > some point at RPI to add journaling to UFS, but there hasn't been much > status on that in a long time. There have also been proposals and > works-in-progress to port JFS, ReiserFS, and XFS. Some of these efforts > are still alive, but they need to be seen through to completion. But at > the risk of opening a can of worms here, I'll say that it's also > important to explore non-GPL alternatives. A thread (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2004-October/040904.html )happens to be talking about ro support for the ReiserFS. After having used this for quite some time in a Linux environment, I can't help but notice that it seriously outperforms any other filesystem I've tried on large numbers of littlish files. A beautiful application that I've rather wanted to try for a while was this on the ports tree. The stage of the current implementation is, as I said, read-only. Further, it's currently i386 only. However, I think that there is enough interest in this new (and relatively exciting) filesystem that we may be able to find some developers with time (Possibly including myself) and desire to try to implement write support and do some porting. To ease any qualms with regards to licensing, it appears (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2004-October/040998.html) that the current implementation is BSD licensed. -- If I write a signature, my emails will appear more personalised.Received on Thu Dec 02 2004 - 18:48:56 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:23 UTC