Talk:JFS (file system)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Criticisms Section[edit]

It seems that with other popular file systems it's standard to include a section detailing the criticisms or shortcomings of the system. Important for those of us also looking for a quick reference on different file systems. Can someone with experience in JFS write something up for this need? (talk) 04:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know is the maximum filesystem size 32TB according to its manpage and my experiences:

The maximum size is determined by the file system block size:

                  fs block size (byte)        MAX fssize (TB)
                  512                         4
                  1024                        8
                  2048                        16
                  4096                        32  — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC) 

Article name?[edit]

Why is this article called "IBM Journaled File System 2 (JFS2)"? Nowhere in the article is "JFS2" mentioned or discussed. Nor should there be an acronym in the page title. I'd move it to "Journaled File System", but that page already exists (and redirects HERE?). What the heck?—Kbolino 01:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

The name certainly doesn't need the extra "(JFS2)" in it. JFS2 should simply be a redirect (as indeed it is). And I'm not sure this name needs the "IBM". I think that "Journaled File System" might be somewhat confusing, as other journaling file systems are sometimes called that, but I would strongly recommend the name Journaled File System 2 (keeping the "2", as that is a valid part of the name). Xtifr tälk 00:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe it is called JFS2 only under AIX where also the ancient JFS1 file system exists (hence, there is a need to distinguish these two file systems). For other operating systems (OS/2 and Linux to name) there is only one JFS file system which is called simply "JFS" (despite that it is based on JFS2 sources from AIX). So, I would vote to drop "2" from the main article name and call it simply "Journaled File System (JFS)". The extra "(JFS)" is needed here to avoid confusion with the journaled file system as a type of file systems. Another option is the name "JFS file system" (which sounds even better to me). Maxal 00:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

This is an interesting issue. I added journaled file system to the JFS disambigation page. I also added JFS2 to the journaled file system page itself, too. --Unixguy 16:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

The current name JFS file system is really dumb. Literally we are saying "journaled file system file system" can we at least switch it to Journaled File System (IBM) or Journaled File System (UNIX). --vossman 04:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

JFS file system sounds OK to me. What wrong about it? JFS is the subject of this article and file system is a specification that helps to distinguish the file system from other JFS means (see JFS). Perhaps, JFS (file system) would be a bit better but I do not see much difference.
But the names Journaled File System (IBM) or Journaled File System (UNIX) are inappropriate since JFS is not a property of IBM anymore and it is not an UNIX term either. Maxal 10:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I can agree on JFS (file system). --vossman 15:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


A JFS supports - Compressed file systems OK for single user workstation Fine for off-line backup areas Otherwise avoid - eats CPU time —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I have added a note on compression feature. Maxal (talk) 19:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Two "contagious space", illness is spreading...[edit]


contagious space -> contigous space  —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC) 


Shouldn't we use SI units ?

"4 PB (4 × 10245 bytes)" sould be "4 PiB (4 × 10245 bytes)"

See : — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Dynamic I-Node Allocation[edit]

This section is unclear, and the title is a little confusing. The section suggests I-Node allocation itself it a dynamic process which does not have a limit in the number of i-nodes allocated for a filesystem. This is false. JFS does have a hard limit for i-nodes which is defined when file system is created, and is a function of the amount of free space available. With JFS i-nodes can be added, however one must increase the available disk space and grow the file system to add additional extents. This is contrary to file systems such as ReiserFS, Reiser4, and ZFS in which i-node allocation is completely dynamic, as they are allocated when the files are created opposed to when the file system is created or expanded. With JFS is it possible (however unlikely) to utilize all the available i-nodes and still have available disk space; in contrast it is not actually possible to utilize all the i-nodes on the aforementioned file systems.

See : Working with JFS i-nodes — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

That's for JFS 1st generation on AIX. JFS on linux and JFS2 on AIX do dynamically allocate inodes, see Working with JFS2 i-nodes and JFS overview (pdf). (talk) 17:22, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


Somebody put a link and irrelevant sentence about backblaze, and linked it to their wikipedia page. I trashed it. --Ian Macintosh —Preceding undated comment added 15:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC).