On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:
This is a valid argument, but it is important for me to clarify a few
issues regarding the statements above:
1. No features are added to Ext3, so there is no concern for the
stability of Ext3.
The feature is added as a new f/s, with the slight overhead of
duplicate code in the
kernel tree and an extra loadable module in the system.
2. From the user's point of view, there is not much difference between
"mount -t next3"
and "mount -t ext4 -o snapshots", because in both cases it would not
be possible to
mount ext4 with extents support on that volume before discarding snapshots and
it will be possible to mount ext4 with extents support after
discarding snapshots.
3. Next3 snapshots are much more scalable durable and efficient than
LVM snapshots.
These are some of the benefits of built-in snapshots support.
4. I do not want to restart the discussion about when btrfs will be
production ready.
As for Next3 stability, I think that with the help of the community,
Next3 can be production ready within a matter of months,
because the Next3 code religiously attempts to retain the stability of
its ancestor Ext3.
I dare you to prove me wrong ;-)
Amir.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html