Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:34:13 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Albert Shih <Albert.Shih@obspm.fr> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS(2, 3 ?) vs ZFS. Message-ID: <20070615183413.GA9693@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20070615165131.GC51206@pcjas.obspm.fr> References: <20070615165131.GC51206@pcjas.obspm.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:51:31PM +0200, Albert Shih wrote: > Hi all > > Anyone known what's the futur of ufs2 ? Is there any plan to make a ufs3 > for very large FS (> 2TB) . Or the plan is to use classic ufs for / & /usr and lets > use ZFS for /home ZFS will remain an optional alternative because of the licensing, so UFS and future derivatives are here to stay. UFS2 does not have problems with creating filesystems >2TB so there is no need for a UFS3 on that account. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGctulWry0BWjoQKURAv3hAJ92PAkNUoJZHyuTS5tlWcKk/R1IswCfTUfq Z+1ctg3NHIvyNiQT1n8EDnQ= =3CEx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070615183413.GA9693>