On Jul 20, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Michael C Garrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Frank Burkhardt wrote:
Sorry. It's 1.4.4 - I just updated the page.
Cool. I imagine your XFS performance would improve greatly with the
no fsync patch that's been discussed on here.
And a few comments on reiser. If you ever need to do a fsck on it
(which we have in our IMAP
environment) the time it takes is really-really-really long for
large partitions (7+ days). We've
since moved away from reiser due to stability issues and back to
ext3.
I tested fsck time, too. Have a look at the table - it was ~4,5x
faster than ext3.
Yeah, but I'd suggest you test reiserfsck with the --rebuild-tree
option and see how long it takes then. We ran into corruption that
would require rebuilding the B-trees and this is what takes a very
long time.
Correct. When the chart says 'fsck', it's not doing an apples and
apples comparison. Your manager might not be happy when that 177
second fsck becomes 600,000 seconds.
There have been a number of fruitless discussions of how well a truly
damaged Reiser fs can actually be recovered on various other mailing
list. I have no idea which party to the discussion is correct, but
until there is better data I don't see enough win in Reiser to be
worth the small-but-undetermined possibility of a long outage.
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
