Kalin KOZHUHAROV <kalin@thinrope.net> writes:
| >> Therefore this article about FS suggests that ReiserFS should be the..
|
| > 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.
>
> To give my $0.02, I'd say I have never had any problems with
> reiserfs-3.6 (the stable one in 2.6.x kernels) for 2 years or so (since
> 2.6.0) on 20+ machines
To each of their own. I experienced constant Kernel panics with
ReiserFS 3.6, which was using LVM underneath with both 2.4+ and 2.6
kernels for about a year. The machines went hi-wire regularly after
month or two until I finally had the time to reinstall and change the
FS to reliable ext3.
I didn't loose any data though, but the panics were annoying, when not
even pulling the power cable dind't reset the machines. I have to
unassemble batteries.
These were laptops servers - think about built-in UPS support :-).
Jari
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Sep 2 14:13:18 2005