On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Joyce <stephen AT physics.unc DOT edu> 
wrote:
>  For anything approaching 1TB or larger, consider xfs over ext3. Fsck'ing a
>  large ext3 filesystem takes ages.

Why would you ever need to fsck a ext3 volume? I suspect that a full
fsck of an xfs volume is just as slow as fscking a ext3 volume...

If you were comparing ext2 and xfs, then I'd agree, but really, there
is no real need to regularly perform a full fsck on ext3 volumes.

-Dave

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/