Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 76.108.130.138]
on September 16, 2007 11:31 PM
I use jfs on very large clusters (16tb+) for very high traffic/profile sites. Its performance/maintenance couldnt be beat. Under high load it never faulters and keeps data flowing. We evaluated xfs vs jfs for awhile. JFS won because of its ability to deal with failing devices better, not bringing a system to its knees at high load, not needing 2tb of swap space for an fsck and fsck didnt take 4hours per 5tb of data. XFS was a little faster with larger files.
Ive heard that IBM "End Of Life'd" jfs for linux, but Ive yet to get a solid confirmation.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
2 years with jfs but its EOL
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 76.108.130.138] on September 16, 2007 11:31 PMIve heard that IBM "End Of Life'd" jfs for linux, but Ive yet to get a solid confirmation.
#