Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.misc:29155 comp.os.386bsd.misc:4016 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.dfn.de!rrz.uni-koeln.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news From: se@fileserv1.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE (Stefan Esser) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: LINUX SUCKS!!!! Date: 8 Nov 1994 01:24:33 GMT Organization: Institute of Nuclear Physics, University of Cologne, Germany Lines: 59 Distribution: world Message-ID: <39mk0hINN1uab@rs1.rrz.Uni-Koeln.DE> References: <085334Z20101994@anon.penet.fi> <385viv$8r4@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu> <CHRISB.94Nov1123540@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: fileserv1.mi.uni-koeln.de In article <CHRISB.94Nov1123540@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>, chrisb@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Chris Bitmead) writes: |> In article <38up48INN1o5e@rs1.rrz.Uni-Koeln.DE> se@FileServ1.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE (Stefan Esser) writes: |> |> >The filesystem is one of the parts, where |> >BSD is far more advanced than Linux, in |> >both speed and robustness (nobody in their |> >right mind would use the option to switch |> >off synchronous metadata updates under BSD, |> >since this might void your filesystem in |> >case of a crash, as is the default under |> >Linux). |> |> Nobody in their right mind would want it turned on since it could cause |> crap meta-data if the system crashes. Better to do it the other way round. |> Write your data first and then update your meta-data. Yes, of course! Were did I write something different ? Synchronous means "do things ordered", while asynchronous means "don't care in which order things get done". The BSD FFS does an fsync() before the (synchronous) metadata update. |> >If you want to discuss filesystem features |> >and pros and cons, feel free to do so. But |> >please first try to understand what the BSD |> >FFS does to combine performance, reliability |> >and economy of disk space use (ie. fragments). |> |> Well if you want to discuss pros and cons you should understand what the |> Linux file system tries to do. Yes, it too has fragments for example. Where did I write that it hadn't ? I wrote about the design goals of the BSD FFS implementation as of BSD 4.2, some 10 years ago. |> >Please get your facts right before posting, |> >since there might be readers of these |> >newsgroups who might be lead to believe |> >the nonsense you wrote ... |> |> Practice what you preach. Yes, I do. And you did not only not read what I wrote, but also cut out the whole of the silly article, that was the reason for my reply. The "get your facts right" was directed at the person who just claimed that BSD systems and the BSD FFS didn't work reliable at all, and that is total nonsense, as prooved by a lot of FTP archive sites all around the world. STefan -- Stefan Esser Internet: <se@ZPR.Uni-Koeln.DE> Zentrum fuer Paralleles Rechnen Tel: +49 221 4706010 Universitaet zu Koeln FAX: +49 221 4705160 Weyertal 80 50931 Koeln