On 05/11/14 16:53, Mick wrote: > On Saturday 10 May 2014 10:33:19 William Kenworthy wrote: >> Note that as I said in my original >> email, "dirvish" really hammers a file system and only reiserfs seems to >> withstand it though I have gotten errors with it in the past. Ive tried >> ext4 (takes only a couple of backup sessions and its unrecoverable, >> btrfs an occasional error with two complete losses of the >> partition/filesystem since Christmas and reiserfs gets rare errors. > > > I moved away from reisefs to ext4 because I was getting some random lockups > when I/O was high. While on reiserfs I also had a couple of corrupt mysql > files and all around poor performance. Now, this was on a machine with a > deficient PSU (I replaced a couple of capacitors since then and it is now > working properly) so I don't want to blame the filesystem because of this > hardware problem. In any case, under these impaired conditions ext4 was a > much better performing filesystem than reiserfs. No lock ups, significantly > faster and no corruption was observed in normal operation - I didn't try to > hammer it. > > So I read your paragraph above with surprise, because in my experience the > opposite was true. At the time I thought that reiserfs was perhaps suffering > from bitrot, because these symptoms had gotten worse over time. This is on > an > installation running since 2005. Not sure what to conclude from these > anecdotal observations ... :-/ >
Everyone's use case and experience with filesystems seems a bit different. One reason I am moving from reiserfs is bitrot - I can see that reiserfs is losing favour. btrfs has potential ... BillK
