[mythtv] FileSystem to use for Myth (was Re:Channel change sp eed)

[Kendrick Vargas]

I'd just like to point out that XFS on Linux 2.4 kernels is a slight hack, 
or at least the last time I heard about it. XFS is really supposed to make 
a good showing on the 2.6 kernels.

The 2.4 kernels are lacking a number of vfs layer features that would make 
a XFS port complete. XFS is supposedly gonna be the cause of a massive 
filesystem overhaul in 2.6 because of the requirements it has for proper 
operation. So... just keep that in mind if you're running this on a 2.4 
kernel :-)

Also, keep in mind that XFS was developed specifically because SGI needed 
to be able to move around and handle large media files in it's rendering 
farms. So it's been developed with this application in mind :-)

Btw, I'm going by word of mouth and not a whole lotta in depth research, 
but I have some confidence in what I've said. Just don't hold me to it 
if I'm wrong ;-)
			-peace

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Boyd II, Willy wrote:

> lol :-)   Yep, that counts more than anything else :-)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Zimmerman [mailto:mdz at debian.org]
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 3:33 PM
> To: 'Development of mythtv'
> Subject: Re: [mythtv] FileSystem to use for Myth (was Re:Channel change
> sp eed)
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 03:27:22PM -0500, Boyd II, Willy wrote:
> 
> > If I'm reading this correctly, it looks as though XFS is pretty good on
> > large file performance.  Does anyone here have any experience using it
> with
> > heavy load, for instance with Mythtv?
> 
> I have experience receiving plenty of bug reports from XFS users when it
> corrupts their files.  Does that count?
> 
> 

-- 
Let he who is without clue kiss my ass