Re: journaling filesystem

stephen farrell (
13 Jun 1997 07:54:47 -0500

Eric Hoeltzel <> writes:

> On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Michael Neuffer wrote:
> > On 12 Jun 1997, stephen farrell wrote:
> > > How important do you consider a good journaling fs for linux?
> >
> > It is essential for all people that need real HA.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> What is HA?

HA = "High Availability", meaning, something like 99.9% uptime.
Presumably the journaling would increase the speed of a reboot,
esp. on systems with large/many disks, and thus increase the chance of
meeting this standard.

> Is ntfs a journaling filesystem?


> Will ntfs become
> mainstream kernel or is it hack value? (i.e. how much are we
> at the mercy of MS on ntfs?)

I seriously doubt that NTFS will become the standard FS for linux (or
even one ever used for any purpose other than to read/write to an NT
partition). Yes, it does have some features that ext2 lacks (such as
journaling, but others too). However, for the same effort it might
take to get a fully useful and fast implementation of NTFS, I'm sure
the ext2 ppl could make an even better FS, and one more appeasing to
their sensibilities and sense of pride =).

> Somehow I get the impression that a journaling fs is just around
> the corner, a year or so tops.

I dunno the answer to this, but I'd be interested to in which project
looks most promising and when ppl working on it are most likely to
reach a useful state with it. (Any chance of seeing something in

>Development sounds like _extremely_
> grinding, dull, meticulous and tedious work. I'm surely very
> glad that so many of you excel at that.

Programming is nothing but fun--I don't know what you're talking
about! (Not to imply that I'm doing _this_ particular programming).