<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 14/07/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Timothy Waters</b> <<a href="mailto:timothy.waters@gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">timothy.waters@gmail.com
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>I've heard from numerous people that XFS has worked wonderfully for them. They said it does much better on the bigger files. </div></blockquote><div><br>The question was about ZFS, not XFS. In my experience XFS is great. Only problem I've had is that xfs_check (I think it was) aborts when it receives an EIO ... so I wasn't able to rescue data from my dying drive. But that's not really XFS' fault...
<br><br>I was excited to try out ZFS because my experience with UFS (I think that's the other filesystem name) has been ... less than satisfactory. UFS was always horribly slow (I'd say even worse than NTFS, but my Sun box is a very old Ultra1, so it's not really a fair comparison), and got very unhappy when it wasn't cleanly unmounted. Unfortunately, Solaris 10 doesn't support my hardware. :(
<br><br></div></div>-- <br>aaron<br><br>"Oh oh oh. I'm incoherent with excitement. Please tell me what fascinating<br>
bit of badger-spewtumly inconsequential trivia you will assail me with next."<br> -- Arthur Dent