On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, The awesome and feared Ciaran McCreesh commented thusly,
> | Ext2 is so badly designed that although we know that journalling file > | systems have additional overhead that non journalling filesystem, but > | although ext2 is a non journalling file system, it cant even match up > | to journalling file systems like reiserfs or XFS. > > Complete bs. Just read the widely respcted and often quoted benchmark link I posted earlier. > | Reiserfs is a stable file system, if you run a 2.4.20 or above kernel > | reiserfs should be stabler than ext3. > > Also bs. It's better than it was, but it's nowhere near as well tested > as ext3. Well then please explain why sourceforge runs the ftp server and CVS server on it and other big sites use it if it is so unreliable. Ext3 is relatively a new filesystem which was buggy as hell just a few years back, reiserfs and XFS have been indevelopment for far more time. XFS is a very old and trusted system and reliable system. So just dont say that ext3 is more well tested than Reiserfs or XFS it is wrong. > | Sourceforge uses it. > > That might explain why sourceforge's cvs is broken so frequently... Its unlikely to be a file system problem, there FTP server is also run using reiserfs and its ok. Generally a lot of the problems that people have said that are reiser bugs are infact due to buggy hardware. I will also state that I am not a file system guru, but I know that when I used XFS as my root partition the startup time for linux was cut down by 1/4 of the time it took for the same virgin distro to bootup using ext3. Grendel. -- Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread :) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
