XFS filesystem revisited

[Kurt Wall]

Consuming 1.4K bytes, Collins Richey blathered:
> FYI.
> 
> >From time to time we have threads about the use of various filesystems (usually
> degrades rapidly to "my fs is better than your fs").

Well, my FS *is* better than your FS, but I digress. ;-)


[Gentoo description of XFS shortcomings snipped]

This makes absslutely no sense. I have deliberately yanked power on a
running system and haven't lost data. The explanation, at least the
section quoted above, entirely disregards the transaction log, which
is the reason that XFS is so good - it can replay or roll back the FS
to a know state.

Kurt
-- 
If a 6600 used paper tape instead of core memory, it would use up tape
at about 30 miles/second.
		-- Grishman, Assembly Language Programming