Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian [LWN.net]

Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian

Posted Apr 27, 2006 6:06 UTC (Thu) by dmantione (guest, #4640)
In reply to: Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian by nevyn
Parent article: Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch (Debian Administration)

That link you post is a big troll. Reiserfsck can indeed rebuild the
filesystem (--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
lot less bugs for very large filesystems than ext3 has.

(Log in to post comments)

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 the
filesystem 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.