|To:||Felipe Alfaro Solana <felipe_alfaro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Subject:||Re: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3|
|From:||Hans Reiser <reiser@xxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:16:16 +0300|
|Cc:||Mike Gigante <mg@xxxxxxx>, Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg.lists@xxxxxxxxxx>, David Weinehall <david@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Ho <andrewho@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dax Kelson <dax@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Nelson <pnelson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ext2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx, jfs-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-list@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007|
Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote:
I think that your expectation is unreasonable. XFS was designed for machines where popping in a working hard drive was feasible. Making a disk layout adaptable to any arbitrary block going bad is more work than you might think, and for their intended market (not laptops) they did the right thing.
You can buy cables that allow you to connect laptop drives to desktops.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: E-mail account security warning., Mike Burger|
|Next by Date:||[Bug 198] was it solved ?, marat|
|Previous by Thread:||RE: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3, Felipe Alfaro Solana|
|Next by Thread:||RE: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3, Mike Gigante|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|