On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 at 2:19pm, Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote
I haven't wanted to bother Tweedie and/or Red Hat in getting an explaination why they aren't looking at supporting XFS, but I think it would solve a lot of scalability issues. I always assumed it wasn't merely a "NIH" attitude, and they had real reasons for not wanting to support it until Ext3 proved to be a serious limitation for them.
The canonical reasons I've heard are 1) they don't want to spend the money/time/resources to acquire enough XFS expertise to support it at the Enterprise level and 2) besides, as of RHEL4 (they claim), XFS doesn't provide anything ext3 already provides, so why bother.
Yes, I've pointed out on official Red Hat mailing lists that 2 is false due (at least) to the issue of backing up ACLs (use star they say -- no thanks, say I), but I got no response to that. And I've got benchmarks showing XFS pretty handily beating ext3 on nice new hardware, but I don't have much faith that would get any response either.