From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:20:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:20:26 -0400 Received: from pD9504018.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.80.64.24]:38640 "HELO ozean.schottelius.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:20:11 -0400 Message-ID: <3B6D4738.6F77A5E0@pcsystems.de> Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 15:16:40 +0200 From: Nico Schottelius X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.7 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Wedgwood CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: ext3/reiserfs: ext3fine, reiser got OOPS! In-Reply-To: <3B6CAE4E.17850717@pcsystems.de> <20010805172718.B20716@weta.f00f.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I 've been using ext3 and reiserfs for somedays with 2.4.7. Using > mkreiserfs I recieved some null pointer problems and recieved a > kernel oops. > > Odd --- nobody else has reported this. Can you plese supply more > details (ksymoops) such that these bugs may be fixed. Retrying it... Seems like it is _not_ reproduceable currently! The mkreiserfs ran through it without any problems! If I can reproduce it again, I will send all informations. > While ext3 is mounted as fast as ext2, reiserfs seems is slower. > > Slower to mount? Or slower to use? Mount and delete. reiserfs I created 200000 empty files, and then deleted them. ext2: creating took a very long time, I aborted (was about 7 minutes) reiserfs: creating was done in about 3 minutes ext2: deleting started with find | xargs rm, no problem. reiserfs: started deleting, recieved NULL pointer (kernel oops) > ext3, 10 GB: ~ 0.5 seconds reisferfs 10 GB: ~ 3-5 seconds > > Probably journal replay, still, you might have slow disks. It's been the same disk. and i don't think it was a reply, because I created the filesystem some seconds before. > A journal > reply for me of 60+ events takes about 1 second on a single spindle > (SCSI, U160). Hmm.... I used udma33 :( > Do it really matter (within reason) which fs mounts and is made > faster? It's not something you do every other minute. You are right. I was only surprised that the so called fast reiserfs takes soo long at mounting. > While running there occured some problems with reiserfs. > > Such as? It was impossible to delete the files on the one partition. (see above) The problem is, after I reformated the partition it was not reproduceable. It seems there are some strange things in reiserfs, which happen at special situations. Nico