joe wrote:
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails
(corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown
such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related
shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of
swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
Dunno, but I think there must have been something else going on there. Maybe
you were running an old version, or you were running it on some old redhat 2.4
kernel (which I've seen problems with)
This was the final Reiser 3.x on Suse 9.3
FWIW reiserfs as shipped by suse has been a trooper for us, a rock star of the
data center as it were. It wouldn't be shipped with SLES if it were flaky.
Those stuffy Swiss bankers have a low tolerance for bugs, you know.
Regardless, in my actual experience, it's not nearly as trustworthy
as XFS or ext3.
And the Reiser was on a system with genuine IBM SCSI disks -- the
highest available quality at the time, so the corruption and losses
can't be blamed on the hard drives. When I upgraded (Suse 9.2 to
Suse 9.3) and got rid of the ReiserFS, I suffered no more data
losses or corruption following crashes and power-glitches.
When we building some big new servers a year or so ago, I did some benchmarks
on ext2, ext3, reiserfs, jfs and xfs. ext3 had some real performance issues,
xfs showed very consistent performance, and jfs had modest performance, but
the lowest cpu usage. For sheer i/o speed, ext2 was the winner, with reiserfs
coming in second, far ahead of the rest of the pack.
Joe
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
