Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion

["Jeffrey V. Merkey" <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>]

Nate Diller wrote:

> On 7/31/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
> > Nate Diller wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/31/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On 7/31/06, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Its well accepted that reiserfs3 has some robustness problems 
> > in the
> > >> >> face of physical media errors. The structure of the file system
> > >> and the
> > >> >> tree basis make it very hard to avoid such problems. XFS appears
> > >> to have
> > >> >> managed to achieve both robustness and better data structures.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> How reiser4 compares I've no idea.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Citation?
> > >> >
> > >> > I ask because your clam differs from the only detailed research 
> > that
> > >> > I'm aware of on the subject[1]. In figure 2 of the iron filesystems
> > >> > paper that Ext3 is show to ignore a great number of data-loss 
> > inducing
> > >> > failure conditions that Reiser3 detects an panics under.
> > >> >
> > >> > Are you sure that you aren't commenting on cases where Reiser3 
> > alerts
> > >> > the user to a critical data condition (via a panic) which leads 
> > to a
> > >> > trouble report while ext3 ignores the problem which suppresses the
> > >> > trouble report from the user?
> > >> >
> > >> > *1) http://www.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Publications/iron-sosp05.pdf
> > >>
> > >> Hi Gregory, Wikimedia Foundation and LKML?
> > >>
> > >> How's Wikimania going. :-)
> > >>
> > >> What he says is correct.  I have seen some serious issues with 
> > reiserfs
> > >> in terms of stability and
> > >> data corruption.  Resier is however FASTER, but the statement is has
> > >> robustness issues is accurate.
> > >> I was using reiserfs but we opted to make EXT3 the default for Solera
> > >> appliances, even when using Suse 10
> > >> due to issues I have seen with data corruption and hard hangs on 
> > RAID 0
> > >> read/write sector errors.  I have
> > >> stopped using it for local drives and based everything on EXT3.  
> > Not to
> > >> say it won't get there eventually, but
> > >> file systems have to endure a lot of time in the field and deployment
> > >> befor they are ready for prime time.
> > >>
> > >> The Wikimedia appliances use Wolf Mountain, and I've tested it for 
> > about
> > >> 4 months with few problems, but
> > >> I only use it for hosting the Cherokee Langauge Wikipedia.  It's
> > >> performance is several magnitudes better
> > >> than either EXT3 or ReiserFS.  Despite this, for vertical wiki 
> > servers,
> > >> its ok to go out with, folks can specifiy
> > >> whether they want appliances with EXT3, Reiser, or WMFS, but iit's a
> > >> long way from being "cooked"
> > >> completely, though it does scale to 1 exabyte FS images.
> > >
> > >
> > > i've seen you mention the Wolf Mountain FS in other emails, but google
> > > isn't telling me a lot about it.  Do you have a whitepaper?  are there
> > > any published benchmark results?  what sort of workloads do you
> > > benchmark?
> > >
> > > NATE
> > >
> > Wikipedia is the app for now.  I have not done any benchmarks on the FS
> > side, just the capture side, and its been transferred to
> > another entity.  I have no idea what they are naming it to, but I expect
> > you may hear about it soon.  One of the incarnations
> > of it is Solera's DSFS which can be reviewed here:
> >
> > www.soleranetworks.com
>
>
> so this is a single stream, write only? ...
>
> > I can sustain 850 MB/S throughput from user space with it -- about 5 x
> > any other FS.  On some hardware, I've broken
> > the 1.25 GB/S (gigabyte/second) windows with it.
>
>
> and you're saying it scales to much higher multi-spindle
> single-machine throughput.  cool.
>
> i'd love to see a whitepaper, or failing that, have an off-list
> discussion of your approach and the various kernel limitations you ran
> up against in testing.  i don't suppose they invited you to the Kernel
> Summit to talk about it, heh.
>
> NATE
The patents have been filed for over a year, and will publish in several 
weeks at uspto.gov -- that's the only acclaim I care for --
one that results in value for the industry and more patent protection 
for Linux and profits for folks.  No, I have not been invited
to the summit, probably because of the lawsuit I filed against some 
folks who were threatening my family -- Peter Anvin booted
me off Kernel.org after allowing folks to pinch my code and copy my bash 
history files all over the internet, and several folks
have stiffed me.  I could care less.  I keep creating cool technology, 
make tons of money off of it, and I have cultivated an
excellent relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation, and I am now the 
principal contributor on the Cherokee Wikipedia.  Wales
even deleted the article folks had used to smear me and made folks 
rewrite it.  Wales is a very nice man and good dude.

I am content to contribute to Linux from a business viewpoint, and if 
the treatment I received from Anvin is par for kernel.org accounts,
I don't care for one -- IP addresses are rather cheap on the 
internet.    I was and have remained loyal to Linux through it all.

I am appreciative of your interest.  Check uspto.gov in next few weeks 
for published applications, it's all described there, distributed
architecture and all. 

All my Wikilove.

Jeff






-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/