On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 02:21:46PM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 08:20:36AM -0700, Nick LeRoy wrote:
> > On Wednesday 11 September 2002 01:43, jw schultz wrote:
> > I think this is a wonderful feature, albeit potentially confusing to a Newbie
> > For my O2 running IRIX I get XFS whether I like it or not, for Solaris I get
> > UFS no matter how much it sucks (I'm not really saying that it does; I don't
> > have much knowledge of it to be honest). This multitude of choices really
> > causes competition between them, and makes them all better in the long run.
>
> On Solaris and some other platforms you can, with lots of
> money, buy a license to run the Veritas journaling
> filesystem. It comes with a license manager and you have to
> get license keys to mount the filesystems. Ever had a
> filesystem not come up after a reboot because the license
> expired, i have (ouch, i told management to renew the
> license). Is veritas fast? I don't know. They hype the
> journaling, not speed. And what are you going to benchmark
> against?.
Against UFS, of course [1] :-) Their hype is "our journal is faster than
UFS", which is probably true. They have extent-based allocation,
which is good for their greatest hype - performance with databases
(see all the marketing shredder-food about [Cached] QuickIO).
They have hot resizing, which fast as hell (again, compared to UFS),
they have snapshots, which are cool. And don't forget the GFS capability,
which I am yet to see in action. [2]
So in Solaris world, for large filesystems, Veritas is the winner. I am
really looking forward to seeing how will they do in the OpenSource
world.
[1] Actually they benchmark Oracle on raw devices vs. Cached QuickIO, too.
[2] Even tough the options are expensive, in my experience all of them
work perfectly.
-- Kind regards, Robert Varga ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ n@hq.sk http://hq.sk/~nite/gpgkey.txt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 15 2002 - 22:00:27 EST