Linux file systems have a number of limitations that make them a poor choice for large and high-performance computing environments. This article explains some of the pros and cons of Linux and old UNIX file systems:
I am frequently asked by potential customers with high I/O requirements if they can use Linux instead of AIX or Solaris.
No one ever asks me about high-performance I/O -- high IOPS (define) or high streaming I/O -- on Windows or NTFS because it isn't possible. Windows and the NTFS file system, which hasn't changed much since it was released almost 10 years ago, can't scale given its current structure. The NTFS file system layout, allocation methodology and structure do not allow it to efficiently support multi-terabyte file systems, much less file systems in the petabyte range, and that's no surprise since it's not Microsoft's target market.
=> Linux File Systems: You Get What You Pay For
What do you think?
Update: Many issues mentioned in linked articles are no longer true. This post was originally written way back in 2006.
Nathan Willis has some good information on this topic.
From the article:
So you just bought and assembled a brand-new AMD64 workstation. The only decision that remains is whether to install a 64-bit Linux distribution, or stick with comfortable, tried-and-true IA-32. If you are seeking an easy answer to that question, I can't help you. Running 64-bit Linux has its pros and cons. Unfortunately, a lot of the cons are out of your hands -- but they're not really Linux's fault, either.
For starters, you should know that there are essentially no proprietary applications for a 64-bit Linux desktop. Google, Adobe, iD, Skype, and the rest of the independent software vendors (ISV) who release Linux binaries of their apps by and large do so solely for 32-bit Intel architecture only.
Read more at Linux.com...