Re: fsfs and Linux filesystems

On Monday 29 August 2005 05:41, Stefan Urbat wrote:
> This FS may be best in matters of performance, but is the worst at now
> regarding data safety: you should avoid ReiserFS IMHO under all
> circumstances for truely important data on truely important servers. I had
> several incidents with it in the past; it is disintegrating itself rather
> quickly under not optimal circumstances.

This is FUD. I can not confirm this. On my notebook and our servers where we
have ReiserFS we never had any problem whatsoever (and my laptop "crashes"
quite often, most often when my girlfriend trips over the power cord ;-). By
contrast, I'll never set up an EXT3 again: one of our servers which has EXT3
needs to do an "fsck -y" /every/ time we reboot it (we do some obscure things
on that machine which is why we need to reboot it very often, i.e. every two
months or so). The others need to fsck on reboot as well because it says the
FS was run too long without checking (and they /always/ find things to fix,
BTW).

I haven't lost data with either EXT2/3 or ReiserFS (other than stupdity like
accidently overwriting the wrong partition, of course), so in term of data
safety I would say they are both good. EXT2/3 requires more manual checking
(fsck) IN MY EXPERIENCE, but YMMV.

-- 
Marc Haisenko
Systemspezialist
Webport IT-Services GmbH
mailto: haisenko@webport.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org