Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Les Mikesell wrote:
> [ReiserFS]
> > production just to avoid the possibility of a slow fsck after a crash,
> > but it is enormously faster at creating and deleting files too because
> > everything is indexed so it would be an ideal stash for fast changing
> > session data. If you don't trust it for the whole system you can just
> > use it on one partition for the session database. Several Linux
> > distributions include it now.
>
> As I recall, it has a problem if you manage to have a hash collision in
> your naming, IIRC it was something to do with the way in which it
> extends the hash it uses for dents. This is, of course, FUD. :) I've also
> heard bad things about his attitude...
>
> FreeBSD 4's softupdates make ufs rather wonderful too. These basically
> make UFS's write() calls asynchronous, and hence much faster. They also
> keep dependencies, and can be very good for spools....
>
> MBM
>
> --
> It is wrong always, everywhere and for everyone to believe anything upon
> insufficient evidence -- W. K. Clifford
i was told by tom lane , a developer of postgres {possible head one
afaik}
said around last year that it ran the best on freebsd /scsi
he didnt like using linux at the time because
of ext2 paging probs but now id sure like to know about linux and
reiserfs
since ive been running mandrake 7.2 on reiserfs, and postgres 7.01 seems
to run very fine
