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@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
