Re: [reiserfs-list] ReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

Dirk Mueller wrote: > > Now consider a good amount of fragmentation because those files get created > over time (weeks, months etc). and you quickly degenerade to a scanning > speed of maybe 10-20 files per second (Athlon 800, IBM 60GB HD with roughly > 35MB/s linear read). It was that horrible

ReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

Bug reports that are hardware failures masquerading as reiserfs bugs dominate our mailing list. We also get bug reports from users with versions that are prior to 2.4.4. We are now working on making the code more likely to identify a hardware failure as a hardware failure (without killing

ReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

Bug reports that are hardware failures masquerading as reiserfs bugs dominate our mailing list. We also get bug reports from users with versions that are prior to 2.4.4. We are now working on making the code more likely to identify a hardware failure as a hardware failure (without killing

Re: [reiserfs-list] ReiserFS seems to be stable as of 2.4.4

Dirk Mueller wrote: Now consider a good amount of fragmentation because those files get created over time (weeks, months etc). and you quickly degenerade to a scanning speed of maybe 10-20 files per second (Athlon 800, IBM 60GB HD with roughly 35MB/s linear read). It was that horrible that