which file system to use

[Dick Davies]

On 07/08/06, ubuntu at rio.vg <ubuntu at rio.vg> wrote:

> Simply put, Solaris is a pain in the ass.  An awful lot of junk depends
> on other things and it all gets installed and runs on boot for no good
> reason.  It's like a big tangled mess.  The GNU tools are much better.
> Who knows, maybe just stripping out the kernel and good things and you
> can make a decent OS, we'll see.  Keep in mind, though, Solaris supports
> far less hardware than Linux does.  Sun servers are incredibly
> expensive.  I had $50,000 machines.  I suspect the drivers are skewed in
> the direction of the more expensive equipment.

I'd be right with you up to the last solaris 10 release. Sun have a lot of
really good stuff out there now, the x86 ports are solid (and a good supported
amd64 box will cost a tenth of the price you're quoting there) and they seem to
be genuinely trying to embrace an open source model.

Packaging is my only reason to choose a linux over solaris these days.

> You see, that's the trick about FS's.  You can stamp out 99.9% of the
> bugs, and maybe only one in a thousand hits it, but for those one in a
> thousand, their data is toast.

Sorry, are you trying to say ext3 is more trustworthy?
I don't see how that follows. Obviously ZFS on Fuse is a different story
(and it's a long way from existing yet, in case anyone had the idea that you
could get a usable version).

-- 
Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
http://number9.hellooperator.net/