Em Ter, 2004-04-27 às 19:44, Benno Goedhart escreveu: > And thanks to people like you it's not getting any more popular. > ReiserFS is evolving and getting better every time. I've used ReiserFS > exclusively since I'm using Linux since last year summer. First on > Gentoo and now on Fedora. I never had any problems with it. Even today > when I had to reset my computer the hard way (Fedora locked up) I > haven't lost any data. > > Ext3 maybe legacy and very good supported and proven. But it's a really > slow FS and the journalling is terrible. > Benno, I have to second Alexander's opinion. Once we had a problem with a debian machine installed on reiserfs. Sadly , when I lost all my hope and needed to check if the disk had bad blocks , I got a message saying that the -c switch wasn't implemented on fsck.reiserfs and that I should contribute to the development of reiserfs. I lost all the data , almost lost my job (one of the professors had important data on that disk) and I didn't even have the chance to see if the disk was problematic. I had to do a destructive test to see if it was ok. Now , should I trust ext3 because it is legacy , very good supported and proven or should I choose reiserfs , which is not complete and whose author asks for money for improvements? I guess I'll choose ext3... or maybe jfs or xfs... Because so far , I've never had any problems with ext3 and I've had only one problem with XFS , but it was due to a bad hard disk on my machine , that caused random locks , even during fsck.. And I trully believe that ext3 is a better option if you dont want to use XFS or JFS.. On some tests I saw , ext3 was just a bit behind reiser , but was considered the best choice because of its wide usage and completeness.. just my R$0,02... -- Pedro Macedo
