From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 10 20:14:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts20.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEF8A37B419 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:14:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from xena.gsicomp.on.ca ([199.243.149.34]) by tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with ESMTP id <20011211041412.GBJE975.tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net@xena.gsicomp.on.ca>; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:14:12 -0500 Received: from hermes (hermes.gsicomp.on.ca [192.168.0.18]) by xena.gsicomp.on.ca (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fBB45xW02997; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:06:00 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from matt@gsicomp.on.ca) Message-ID: <00a301c181fa$4764a5b0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> From: "Matthew Emmerton" To: , "Tony" References: <20011210220153.50612.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com> <20011210161410.L92148@elvis.mu.org> <002601c181cb$8c6a5e90$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20011210174711.A3208@mail.slc.edu> <20011210220153.50612.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com> <20011210161410.L92148@elvis.mu.org> <002601c181cb$8c6a5e90$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20011210220153.50612.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com> <20011210174711.A3208@mail.slc.edu> <20011211105617.K63585@monorchid.lemis.com> <20011210195725.A4697@mail.slc.edu> <7UAeNSA2SWF8Iwe5@ubik.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:14:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Most current users will probably not like the speed penalties of a > journal file system, and stick to the faster FS. On the other hand a > solid journal FS may encourage more take up for back end databases, for > e-commerce, data warehousing, etc... The transaction support of JFS isn't really viable for large-scale database implementations because it imposes a real speed penalty. Most large-scale DB2 or Oracle installations use raw disk, and let the transaction support in the database keep everything sane. The real benefit of JFS (or any other journaling FS) is to provide a transactional guarantees for everyday disk activites. The best example I can think of is a large multi-user UNIX box in a programming environment, with multiple CVS trees, local working copies of code, and lots and lots of updates (compiles, checkouts, search-and-replace, etc.) It is in this kind of environment that you want the assurance that any update will either pass or fail -- nothing in between to cause corruption that could potentiall remain undetected and eventually snowball into an unusuable filesystem. -- Matt Emmerton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message