On 28/07/14 18:45, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> On 07/28/2014 06:37 AM, Brent L. Bates wrote:
>>       At my previous job, I used the XFS file system almost
>> exclusively.  I only used ext[2-3], if I had no other choice and I
>> usually worked to get them changed to XFS, if at all possible.  I
>> started using XFS when it first came out for SGI's, probably 20 years
>> ago..  I also used xfsdump/xfsrestore to tape.  When we switched to
>> LINUX, I also used XFS there as well.  XFS and it's utilities are
>> VASTLY superior to ext[2-4] and dump/restore.  XFS is better, faster,
>> HUGELY more reliable, and far more robust tha ext[2-4].  I've seen XFS
>> survive repeated system crashes and hardware failures and still be
>> able to get my data off of it.
>>
>>       restore doesn't care what file system you restore to.  All it
>> cares about is the source.  You should be able to take your old dumps
>> and restore them to XFS file systems.  Once on your new XFS file
>> systems, use xfsdump/xfsrestore to create new backups.
>>
> 
> Hi Brent,
> 
>     Awesome!  Thank you!
> 
>     So if I was happy with ext4, I should be delirious
> with XFS.

XFS: the filesystem of the future  (Jan, 2012)
<https://lwn.net/Articles/476263/>

It's a bit dated, but didn't find anything else quickly.  The core
message seems to still be relevant.


David S.