| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (DebianFilesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (DebianPosted Apr 26, 2006 13:46 UTC (Wed) by dmantione (guest, #4640)In reply to: Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian by nix Parent article: Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Administration)
Stop trolling please. For terabytes of data, xfs and reiserfs are the
(Log in to post comments)
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 26, 2006 16:56 UTC (Wed) by nevyn (subscriber, #33129) [Link] Feel free to read about how bad fsck.reiferfs is. If you want to use reiserfs for the speed, feel free to do so ... just don't pretend you don't need a really good backup strategy.
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 26, 2006 21:21 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Oh, yes, I spotted that when it went by for the first time. The idea of `stitch reiserfsish blocks together' makes a lot of sense until you consider loop...
(One possible fix would be to put an fs-specific uuid in every block, but I hope anyone actually trying this realises how crazy it is and shoots themselves for the sake of our disk space.)
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 27, 2006 6:06 UTC (Thu) by dmantione (guest, #4640) [Link] That link you post is a big troll. Reiserfsck can indeed rebuild thefilesystem (--rebuild-tree) from scratch by searching the disk. You only use it when no other recovery is possible. However, if no other recovery is possible, the recovery chance is still near 100%, unless you indeed had reiserfs images on your disk, but I doubt that is the case for many people.
No, I don't use reiserfs for speed. It just happens that it contains a
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 27, 2006 13:08 UTC (Thu) by erich (subscriber, #7127) [Link] --rebuild-tree didn't work for me, and reiserfsck made things actually _worse_. It's crap. Or it was back then, when I stopped using reiserfs.
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 27, 2006 13:54 UTC (Thu) by dmantione (guest, #4640) [Link] Yes, --rebuild-tree rebuilds the entire filesystem, so if it fails thefilesystem is not accessible because the old tree is no longer available. This situation remains until a successfull rebuild has been done, so investigate what the cause of the failure is and try again.
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 29, 2006 10:56 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] This is, of course, an extremely... peculiar design. The robust approach would be to build a new tree in parallel with the old (as long as space was available and the old tree was undamaged enough to determine which blocks were free), then switch over to the old atomically.
This is harder, but it does make the thing fail-safe.
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 27, 2006 13:06 UTC (Thu) by erich (subscriber, #7127) [Link] reiserfs may have excellent reliability...... unless it crashes and trashes your whole filesystem, that is.
Happended to me, and if you do a poll on a major linux channel you'll find tons of people burnt by reiserfs.
Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Posted Apr 28, 2006 4:43 UTC (Fri) by zooko (subscriber, #2589) [Link] The trouble is that "doing a poll", or more realistically chatting back and forth and swapping war stories, is a terrible way to figure out the truth about things. Humankind has recently developed a set of alternate techniques to figure out the truth about things, which collectively go under the rubric of "science". The older technique would best be titled "folklore".
It is part of Linux culture to sit around and swap stories and form sort of a group consensus on things which are otherwise not measured or analyzed. Does the group consensus usually settle on the truth? Who knows. Folklore is often right. Sometimes not. I'll withhold judgment until I see something better.
(The article linked to in this thread that did fault injection and source analysis of myriad possible failures is an example of something better.)
Regards,
Zooko
|
|
||||||||||||