Message-ID: <3BAB119A.29888F3D@god.bel.alcatel.be>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 12:08:26 +0200
From: kris buggenhout <buggenkr@god.bel.alcatel.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com" <linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: XFS to main kernel source
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109211018430.21430-100000@helka>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk

Narancs v1 wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Oh guys I did not think that this is so "technically impossible".
> It's good for me to be informed what phylosofical differences you have
> between SGI and Linux programming style.
> 
> If the merge will not happen in around a half year - I think SGI/XFS "will
> lose market share". And Ext3 is gonna get more of the pie as that is
> (maybe) possible to patch in the kernel.
> 

I dont think ext3 will be the contender as the design of ext3 is only a
patched up ext2, with a lot of limitations to it...

I would be more concerned if Reiserfs should get its act together or IBM
invests more time into Enterprise storage manager ( on top of jfs) 

For the enterprose world I see Vxfs as a threat ... in unison with
volume manager.If Veritas pulls that off in a reasonable time frame... a
lot of company's will opt for Vxfs and volume manager, because it can be
used on almost all of their platforms : wincrap2k, Solaris, Irix, Linux,
HPUX, AIX,... etc...

having a unified fs architecture across platforms is a bonus ...
knowledge of platform is not as important anymore regarding storage (
which is a large part of systems management)....