Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:08:26 -0400 From: Shannon Hendrix <shannon@widomaker.com> To: Jason Andresen <jandrese@mitre.org> Cc: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu>, ccf@master.ndi.net, gordont@bluemtn.net, jkh@osd.bsdi.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: technical comparison Message-ID: <20010522210824.C2734@widomaker.com> In-Reply-To: <3B0A6A36.5E8EF98C@mitre.org>; from jandrese@mitre.org on Tue, May 22, 2001 at 09:31:34AM -0400 References: <200105220411.f4M4BDX101825@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <3B0A6A36.5E8EF98C@mitre.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 09:31:34AM -0400, Jason Andresen wrote: > Er, I don't think ReiserFS is in the Linux kernel yet, although it is > the default filesystem on some distros apparently. ReiserFS, on my system anyway, started just losing files. I'd log in and would notice some mp3 files or source code was just gone. No heavy load, and no crashes. Nope, not for me. I think they'll get it in time if the basic design isn't flawed, but things like an fs just take a lot of time to debug and come to trust. There are already some very good journaling systems, and it would seem better to get them ported, and leave things like ReiserFS a research project until it proves itself. > That said, it would be hard to be much worse than Ext2fs with write cacheing > enabled (default!) in the event of power failure. Point taken, but the "yank power, see who survives" test is illogical and dangerous thinking. Besides, my drives have megabytes of write-cache that I cannot disable. Most are large enough to cause problems for most any fs if they crash at just the right moment. From what I have read, a lot of drives really ignore commands to turn it off or do synchronous writes. Both ext2 and ufs both handle my chores with little or no trouble. On some systems, I've actually preferred ufs to the journaled file systems. > We only have three Linux boxes here (and one is a PC104 with a flash > disk) and already I've had to reinstall the entire OS once when we had a > power glitch. ext2fsck managed to destroy about 1/3 of the files on the > system, in a pretty much random manner (the lib and etc were hit hard). This is not typical. Also, I have heard the same thing from other people about flash disks. fs crash, fsck, and a mess afterwards. It would be nice if you could use ufs and see if the same problem exists. -- "There's music along the river For Love wanders there, Pale | | | flowers on his mantle, Dark leaves on his hair." -- James Joyce | | | ________________________________________________________________ / | \ s h a n n o n @ w i d o m a k e r . c o m _/ | \_ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010522210824.C2734>