| |||||||||||||
Time for ext4?Time for ext4?Posted Jun 15, 2006 13:22 UTC (Thu) by job (guest, #670)Parent article: Time for ext4?
There is no shortage of more interesting file systems than ext3. If the
(Log in to post comments)
Time for ext4? Posted Jun 15, 2006 15:41 UTC (Thu) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link] I think the biggest problem with reiser4 is the various 'political/religous' wars between Hans Reiser and many other kernel developers. Hans does fantastic work, but he seems to have a hard time taking criticism or dealing with people who want to keep a status quo for a while.
One problem I have heard from commercial people is what happens when reiser5 comes out? Do we end up with the same 'upgrade or else' arguments that seemed to come out when reiser3 came out. These were people who had been using reiser3 and felt burned when they couldn't get fixes except from SuSE and some felt derided by Hans when they didn't want to move all their production systems to reiser4 immediately.
Time for Reiser4? Posted Jun 18, 2006 2:12 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] I think the biggest problem with reiser4 is the various 'political/religous' wars between Hans Reiser and many other kernel developers. I agree, but it's irrelevant to this conversation. There's no law that Hans Reiser has to be the one to develop and maintain Reiser4. If the Linux community wants a better filesystem type and existing Reiser4 code is the best starting point available for that, there's no reason the Linux community can't do the required development, and then properly support users of that filesystem type in the future.
Time for ext4? Posted Jun 16, 2006 15:29 UTC (Fri) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] On my production server I don't want an "interesting" filesystem. I wantone that (among other things) I can rely on to work well now and far into the future. Switching back and forth is nice, but a one-way upgrade path is still better than a total dump-and-restore.
|
|||||||||||||