On Thursday 25 December 2003 15:32, Robert Crawford wrote:
> On Thursday 25 December 2003 8:43 am, Spider wrote:
> > Not really, overall I advice against ReiserFS because of their horrid
> > recovery-tools. Jfs I've had mixed success with but overall it felt
> > good. I haven't evaluated xfs because so far it hasn't been mainline
> > when I've started to work on repartitioning.
> >
> > Ext3 isn't the fastest in the race, but it has a darn good support team.
> > That matters a lot for me.
> > //Spider
>
> I've been following this discussion, and must differ with Spider, even
> though I'm sure he knows much more Linux than I do. At least in my case
> (desktop/home usage box), I originally used ext2/3. About a year ago, I
> switched all my boxes over to reiserfs, and the improvement in
> responsiveness and overall speed was, in a word, drastic- so much so that I
> would never consider going back ( I do use ext3 on my Gentoo /boot
> partition).
>
> I've never lost one bit of data when having to do a reboot after a lockup
> (I do lots of kernel and app testing with Gentoo ~x86 systems, and Mandrake
> cooker). The reiserfs journaling has always worked perfectly for me. I do
> work with generally small files, which reiser is suppose to excel at. I
> generally defer to Spider's expertise, but since it became clear that he
> was not a reiserfs fan, I thought I'd offer a different opinion, based on
> my personal experience with reiserfs. As usual, YMMV, and reiserfs might
> not be the best choice in all cases.
i second that, ReiserFS is a great filesystem and I use it for all my boxes as
the primary filesystem. Never had trouble with it, and I used about every
kernel from 2.5.0 through 2.6.0.
The only downside is with my mailer: kmail, it is really slow on opening a
Maildir mailbox. But that is is problem of kamil and _not_ the filesystem!
Rudmer
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
