From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:42:02 +0100 Message-ID: <1154374923.7230.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1153760245.5735.47.camel@ipso.snappymail.ca> <200607241806.k6OI6uWY006324@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl> <20060731125846.aafa9c7c.reiser4@blinkenlights.ch> <20060731144736.GA1389@merlin.emma.line.org> <20060731175958.1626513b.reiser4@blinkenlights.ch> <20060731162224.GJ31121@lug-owl.de> <20060731173239.GO31121@lug-owl.de> <20060731181120.GA9667@merlin.emma.line.org> <20060731184314.GQ31121@lug-owl.de> <20060731191712.GE17206@HAL_5000D.tc.ph.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20060731191712.GE17206@HAL_5000D.tc.ph.cox.net> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Clay Barnes Cc: Rudy Zijlstra , Adrian Ulrich , vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl, ipso@snappymail.ca, reiser@namesys.com, lkml@lpbproductions.com, jeff@garzik.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-list@namesys.com Ar Llu, 2006-07-31 am 12:17 -0700, ysgrifennodd Clay Barnes: > Of course, if ext3 were proven to be more robust against failures, I bet > the reiser team would be very interested in all the forensic data you > can offer, since, from what I've seen, they are always trying to make > reiser as good as possible---in speed, flexability, *and* robustness. Its well accepted that reiserfs3 has some robustness problems in the face of physical media errors. The structure of the file system and the tree basis make it very hard to avoid such problems. XFS appears to have managed to achieve both robustness and better data structures. How reiser4 compares I've no idea. Alan