From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262360AbVF1BN2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 21:13:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261927AbVF1BN1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 21:13:27 -0400 Received: from hummeroutlaws.com ([12.161.0.3]:20753 "EHLO atpro.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262360AbVF1BNS (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 21:13:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 21:07:28 -0400 From: Jim Crilly To: Prakash Punnoor Cc: Steve Lord , "Theodore Ts'o" , Hans Reiser , Markus T?rnqvist , Horst von Brand , David Masover , Alan Cox , Jeff Garzik , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ReiserFS List Subject: Re: reiser4 plugins Message-ID: <20050628010728.GC24548@mail> Mail-Followup-To: Prakash Punnoor , Steve Lord , Theodore Ts'o , Hans Reiser , Markus T?rnqvist , Horst von Brand , David Masover , Alan Cox , Jeff Garzik , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ReiserFS List References: <42BB7B32.4010100@slaphack.com> <200506240334.j5O3YowB008100@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <20050627092138.GD11013@nysv.org> <20050627124255.GB6280@thunk.org> <42C0578F.7030608@namesys.com> <42C05F16.5000804@xfs.org> <20050627202841.GA27805@thunk.org> <42C06873.7020102@xfs.org> <42C0868E.4080003@punnoor.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42C0868E.4080003@punnoor.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/28/05 01:06:54AM +0200, Prakash Punnoor wrote: > > So I gave ext3 a try. Very robust, but at the same time slooow. I couldn't > bear it after some months. So I gave xfs another try. Yes, now it felt much > better. Still not that fast as reiserfs, IIRC, but better than the first time > I tried. I am still having xfs on / and it works pretty well, and is rather > robust against hard locks with about the same amount of data losing as > reiserfs. But what annoys me very much, is that I have to run xfs_repair by > hand and by booting from another partition. Even after a hard lock, the > partition mounts w/o problems and everything seems OK, but it only seems like > that. In fact after some hours/days of use, you'll notice oddities, like files > or directories which cannot be removed and things like that. After running > xfs_repair everything is back in order. I don't know what was going on with your systems, but I've been using XFS since the original 1.0 Linux release from SGI and I'd guess that I've had to run xfs_repair less than 10 times and most of them were on Alpha and Sparc64 before issues with those arches got ironed out. Right now I have XFS on both Alpha and Sparc64 and I haven't had any issues on either box. Infact the Sparc64 box's XFS filesystem was converted from reiser3 because the some part of the filesystem got mysteriously corrupted in such a way that reiserfsck and the reiser3 driver both thought it was fine but accessing a certain file would cause a lockup. I really hope the reiser4 userland tools are a lot better than the reiser3 tools, that's an area that reiserfs has lagged behind hugely IMO. > > In between I gave an alpha (or rather several alphas) of reiser4 a try - but > not on /, just on /usr. Well, I wouldn't say it was extraordinary fast. In > fact it felt slower than reiserfs V3, but much more space efficient. And to my > surprise it was very robust as well. Hard-locks were no problem. Only annoying > then was, that unmounting regularly produced oops but later versions corrected > that. But nevertheless it didn't survive, as like V3, with time V4 became > slower and slower. In this case no year was needed, but just one month or > alike. So end of test...but in fact I'll give V4 another go in the near future. > > > All in all I can say that every fs I tested was able to not smoke all of my > data, even using an instable machine - but only ext3, reiser v3 and v4 were > non-annoying. But xfs is majorly annoying in that respect. I hope that new > versions will be able to keep consistency w/o having to run xfs_repair every > time after a lock-up... > > But what I don't understand is, that sometimes even files, which were only > opened for reading, got overwritten with @^@^@ after a lock-up. I don't > understand the logics here, how this could happen. > > Thx for your time, > > Prakash Jim.