Isn't this terribly inefficient? The only personal document Microsoft really wants control of is your savings account -- storing all these other documents is just a waste of disk space. What are they thinking?
XFS looks more appropriate for large databases with huge disk sizes and file sizes (and stringent time-to-recover requirements), as well as for huge multimedia files (which SGI of course is traditionally focused on).
Disclaimer: I work for SGI. SGI created XFS.
I've been running XFS on my IRIX desktop since 1995. There is one fairly good reason to use XFS on the desktop, which I haven't seen mentioned: you never ever have to fsck.
Several people have asked why the Palm V is interesting. I want one, and I want it for one reason: it'll actually fit in my shirt pocket. I probably won't use it for anything that my old PPP ro won't do, but it'll actually fit in my shirt pocket.
(Hey, I just lost my/. virginity. First post, of a sort.)
I am delighted that evolution will never arrive at that particular fitness criterion.
Isn't this terribly inefficient? The only personal document Microsoft really wants control of is your savings account -- storing all these other documents is just a waste of disk space. What are they thinking?
K<bob>
So, does PDP still stand for Pink & Dark Pink?
K<bob>
Disclaimer: I work for SGI. SGI created XFS.
I've been running XFS on my IRIX desktop since 1995. There is one fairly good reason to use XFS on the desktop, which I haven't seen mentioned: you never ever have to fsck.
K<bob>They can't spell "googol", either.
(Menu entry is labeled "google search".
K
Several people have asked why the Palm V is interesting.
/. virginity. First post, of a sort.)
I want one, and I want it for one reason: it'll actually fit
in my shirt pocket. I probably won't use it for anything
that my old PPP ro won't do, but it'll actually fit in my
shirt pocket.
(Hey, I just lost my
K<bob>