Re: XFS in the main kernel

[Martin Knoblauch]

Stephen Lord wrote:
> 
> Martin Knoblauch wrote:
> 
> >
> > definitely. Unless XFS is in the mainline kernel (marked as
> >experimantal if necessary) it will not get good exposure.
> >
> > The most important (only) reason I do not use it (and recommend our
> >customers against using it) is that at the moment it is impossible to
> >track both the kernel and XFS at the same time. This is a shame, because
> >I think that for some application XFS is superior to the other
> >alternatives (can be said about the other alternatives to :-).
> >
> 
> You would be surprised about the level of exposure XFS is getting, a lot
> more
> than you might realize. It is in everything from settop boxes and fiber
> channel
> switches to NAS boxes, those folks in general do not want to advertise.
> Here are
> a few larger scale installations out there:
> 
> http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/xfs_users.html
> 
> Steve
Steve,

 no question that those are seriour users that give you serious
feedback. And if you call that
exposure, I am not going to argue. It is your project, it is your
marketing. (And *I* am not going to argue about SGI marketing :-(

 From a mainline point of view XFS on Linux will only be successfull if
it is "in the kernel". Fully maintained and "Linus approved". I am not
sure when SGI started the port (could even go back to the time when I
worked for them, late 1997). Definitely quite some time. By now it
should be in the kernel. Maybe marked "experimental". As I see it now
EXT3, ReiserFS and maybe JFS are just eating the XFS lunch away.

 In any case, the Vanderbilt comment is right on.

Martin
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Knoblauch         |    email:  [e-mail]
TeraPort GmbH            |    Phone:  [phone]
C+ITS                    |    Fax:    [phone]
http://www.teraport.de   |    Mobile: [phone]