FWIW, to my recollection I've never had a problem with SFS. I started using it when my YAM email folders would take for-frikken-ever to open on an FFS-formatted volume. SFS sped this up dramatically. I did some testing with PFS when it went PD and found that it is even faster than SFS for the same tasks.
As for PFS, in another thread I talked about lessons and observations moving a 10GB volume from SFS to PFS. I ran into a problem restoring the files from my lha backup and it turned out the volume had two corrupted directory entries. Fixed them with PFSDoctor and everything's been smooth, since. I never had this happen on my SFS volumes when moving from FFS.
I still have an SFS volume on this drive that I may very well leave alone, if only to see if it ever dies. It's not an active volume in the sense of regular read-write usage: it houses a lot of WHDLoad games and various programs I don't want borking up my system drive. All-in-all, PFS3 is already proving itself to me as a performance winner and I may re-do my boot partition with PFS3 instead of FFS v45.15 current running on it.
