Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 141 to 143 of 143

Thread: Tuxera Claims NTFS Is The Fastest File-System For Linux

  1. #141
    Join Date
    Jan 2008


    Quote Originally Posted by cb88 View Post
    And anyone wanting data integrity is going to be running raid as there isn't anything saying that a whole drive couldn't go kaput. noone will rely on the FS alone to save them...
    The point isn't really for the FS alone to save you from a hardware failure, it's that there are failure modes in which you won't even know that a failure happened unless something is hashing the data on a regular basis. It doesn't have to be the filesystem, but that's arguably a reasonable place to do it (and ZFS is really more like a combination of filesystem/volume management/softraid than just a FS anyway).

  2. #142


    Quote Originally Posted by cb88 View Post
    I'm confused X.x 48 cores is trivial these days 12 cores per die is off the shelf stuff... and quad socket mobos aren't that uncommon. I even know a fellow that has at 32 core box with quad channel ram on a relativly light budget as well its quite a beast for a serverish/desktop.
    Yep, but some people live in 2000.

  3. #143
    Join Date
    Nov 2011


    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Is filesystem DESIGNED to withstand all those errors? Hell, NO.
    It is like blaming Joe from Los Angeles in Fukushima crisis! He is american, and americans delivered parts to Nippon, so he is responsible for nuclear meltdown! He is NOT.
    What is Joe responsible? To support his family and do it well! There is no point in giving every single Joe nuclear physician education to control the reactor either!

    Projected to this "analysis", the file system should only do what filesystem should do - and do it well.
    Crazycheese, your poor grammar leads me to think that you are from a non-english speaking region. I'm from australia, but i'm aware that in america (as per your example) there is legal precedent to indicate that if you develop parts for a purpose (such as a nuclear reactor) and they have a failure, then you can be at fault for negligence. From memory the precedent was kind-of set by a case involving buick and some wheel manufacturer.

    Also, it might be useful for you to think about what a filesystem is. It's a component that is used by the computer to reliably read and write information in a persistent way. Hardware failures might cause the filesystem to work incorrectly, but the file-system can very feasibly be improved to get around a lot of problems.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts