Re: UFS filesystem size limit

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 11:46:57AM +0200, Michel Talon wrote:
> 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.

Don't compare experimental filesystems with UFS :-) But seriously, the
structure of JFS and XFS is very different from UFS, e.g. the use of
btrees for almost anything. That makes them more suitable for some
operations, but horrible for others. It depends on how big your
directories are, how big your files are and all that. There is no
perfect filesystem after all. As you said, the nice thing about UFS is
that it performs well in all cases.

Joerg