Once upon a time, Przemek Klosowski <przemek.klosowski@xxxxxxxx> said: > I understand that by now XFS got so much exercise that its > robustness is unimpeachable. As to the size, I see that while the > latest XFS kernel module is one of the larger kernel modules around, > it probably is no longer significant on today's multi-GB > systems---the extra megabyte at current memory prices is just a one > cent increase in the system cost, after all. That is true for some systems, but not necessarily for all. Many ARM systems are RAM-constrained, and some people using lots of server VMs also like to keep each VM as small as practical. > I am pretty sure that ext4 is a built-in module in Fedora kernels, > as well as in the boot environment; making XFS the default will > require also building it in, pretty much forever, while we still > need extXX, and whatever comes next (btrfs?). I am OK with that, > though. Not really, it is only recent Fedora releases that have built ext4 into the kernel. We went many years with ext3 being loaded as a module (was it ever built in?); ext4 was added more for convenience. Having the "common stuff" that's going to be loaded on something like 99% of Fedora systems anyway built into the kernel is slightly more efficient and more convenient. If we have a split between filesystems between products, then it probably doesn't make sense to build any of them into the kernel anymore (well, assuming they all use the same kernel RPMs). -- Chris Adams <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
