Kevin Brown wrote:
>
> I caught this link on Slashdot the other day and (not to start a flame war) was
> wondering what people thought of ext3fs for large drives.
>
> http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-22-004-20-NW-RH
>
> The reason I'm asking is that my company is looking to get a new server with 4
> 73GB Ultra3 SCSI drives. This will be a replacement/add-on server in the server
> room running Linux as a database/web machine. We have a Quad PII450 Xeon
> running RH6.2 and it can take quite a long time to fsck the 60GB of current
> space that it has when it boots up from something bad (Can't recall this ever
> happening while I've been there).
> ________________________________________________
This was written yesterday on the seawolf list (redhat 7.1)
> Well, since installing the 2nd beta last night, my system has seemed to run
> pretty good with exception of it being a little slow. The release-notes
> still have vmware testing for the kernel in it, is that still going on?
>
> Also, just few minutes ago while it's actually still storming outside, my
> electricity went out for a split second. Both my Linux computers shut off
> and restarted, my WinXP RC2 machine stayed on, hrmm.
>
> Anyway, I only have one monitor so I watched the Roswell machine boot up and
> saw how it recovered whatever it needed to and what not with the journaled
> filesystem and booted right on up with out errors as far as I could see.
>
> On the other hand, as soon as that one was already into KDE and done, I
> switched monitors over to Seawolf and it had barely finished doing it's
> checking against ext2 and then booted on up.
>
> In other words, ext3 recovered and booted up the system about 1-2 minutes
> before Seawolf did, and ext3 is on a tad slower computer, heh.
(text/plain)