recommending reiserfs?
Samuel Flory
sflory at rackable.com
Wed Apr 28 00:13:15 UTC 2004
Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> Am Di, den 27.04.2004 schrieb Stefanescu Vlad um 21:19:
>
>
>>Hi. Got a question for all you gurus out there ! :)
>>I came upon this filesystem (new to me), which is said by many to be
>>more effective that ext3.
>>It is said to have an internal arborescent system which is supposed to
>>improve disk performance.
>> From hands-on experience... is that true?
>>Thanks in advance...
>>
>>Vlad,
>
>
> In addition to what Steven replied, many people reported data loss using
> reiserfs in the past. The reiserfs maintenance tools often make a crash
> situation and recovering even worse. Well, if the man developer (Hans
> Reiser) himself states that over all speed is above data
> security/integrity as a development goal ... What will you expect then?
> I once lost data and never touched reiserfs again, sharing this
> experience with many others.
>
> YMMV
>
Strange as my experince is the exact reverse. I find reiserfs to be
far more robust than ext3. It certainly seems to deal with powering off
on ide systems better than ext3. I use to dread blowing a fuse on a
rack with 80+ ide systems under heavy io load. Reiserfs rarely requires
an fsck in such cases, while ext3 does on a 1/4 of the systems.
My only issues with reiserf is that the fedora developement 2.6
kernels keep breaking reiserfs support in one way or another. Also be
aware that a number of linux distros use reiserfs as their default fs.
Suse, Lindows, Gentoo and Xandros come to mind as prime examples.
--
There is no such thing as obsolete hardware.
Merely hardware that other people don't want.
(The Second Rule of Hardware Acquisition)
Sam Flory <sflory at rackable.com>
More information about the users
mailing list