On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 05:47:56PM +0200, Matthias Buelow wrote: > > Is CentOS using ext2? I thought everyone moved to ext3 already, which > provides nearly the speed of ext2+async but is safe due to its journal. > If you make such comparisons, please use current technology, and not > the status quo of 5 years ago.
CentOS uses ext3 by default. How does having a journal help if the journal is stored on the same async filesystem? Unless the journal writes are guaranteed sync. > [Apart from that, over the last decade, I've lost more UFS filesystems > than ext2, so at least for me, that purported unsafety of ext2+async > mounts is theoretical at best. In the end, with today's write-caches > usually enabled, both are essentially the same, anyways.] AFAIK, SCSI disks normally have write caching disabled. Proper RAID controllers also won't do write-back caching by default unless there's a battery backup. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
