Re: UFS filesystem size limit

[Michel Talon <talon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hiten Pandya wrote:
> Once it has been appropriately cleaned up, it should be no problem at 
> all to bring in UFS2, minus features like snapshots which can be better 
> chieved with some form of VFS journalling that Matt is working on at the 
> moment.

Once more i think you are perfectly right. UFS2 has features which are
very important like ACL and so on. I think  that softupdates
and snapshots are finally not such a great idea, however snapshots may
be useful as an undelete machanism to protect users against mistakes,
or to be able to run dumps of live fiesystems.
As far as recovery after a crash is involved, clearly nothing beats 
journalling, and i have to say that performancewise, i have the 
impression that Linux journalled filesystems do *very* well
compared to FreeBSD, or at least reiserfs shines when managing a lot of 
small files like a news spool and xfs for streaming large files, when
BSD UFS performs well in the medium case.