On 12/11/06, Douglas Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I ran into this. I started with ext2 (the standard) which got corrupted
and lost files with power failure. Went to ext3 (ext2 + journal) which
was better but __silently__ would lose files. Went to Reiserfs which
would get corrupted by rei
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 06:25:47PM +0530, Amit Joshi wrote:
> On Monday 11 December 2006 18:09, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > * Douglas Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006 Dec 11 06:16 -0600]:
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Jeff Zhang wrote:
> > > > which fs system (jfs, xfs or future ext4)
On Monday 11 December 2006 18:09, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * Douglas Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006 Dec 11 06:16 -0600]:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Jeff Zhang wrote:
> > > which fs system (jfs, xfs or future ext4) will perform better for
> > > desktop usage under occasional power
* Douglas Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006 Dec 11 06:16 -0600]:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Jeff Zhang wrote:
> > which fs system (jfs, xfs or future ext4) will perform better for desktop
> > usage under occasional power failure circumstance? like recover from power
> > failure and f
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Jeff Zhang wrote:
> which fs system (jfs, xfs or future ext4) will perform better for desktop
> usage under occasional power failure circumstance? like recover from power
> failure and fragment after long time run.
> thanks in advance!
I ran into this. I
which fs system (jfs, xfs or future ext4) will perform better for desktop
usage under occasional power failure circumstance? like recover from power
failure and fragment after long time run.
thanks in advance!
6 matches
Mail list logo