From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262521AbVF1EYH (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:24:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262520AbVF1EYH (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:24:07 -0400 Received: from atpro.com ([12.161.0.3]:61196 "EHLO atpro.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262521AbVF1EXz (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:23:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:19:49 -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: <20050628041949.GE24548@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: <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> <20050628010728.GC24548@mail> <42C0CC0D.9040103@punnoor.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42C0CC0D.9040103@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 06:03:25AM +0200, Prakash Punnoor wrote: > Jim Crilly schrieb: > > 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. > > Perhaps it is due to the fact that I use xfs on software RAID-0 and both HDs > have 8MB cache write-back enabled? So, all in all 16MB needs to be commited > on/before lock-up, maybe too much for xfs? (This situation was no prob for > ext3, though. Thinking again, I never used reiser V3 or V4 on the RAID-0, so > my comparison might not have been fair.) Maybe, I've never used XFS on software RAID-0. The Sparc64 I mentioned has it's XFS filesystem on software RAID-1 and that's introduced no problems, but I've seen way too many drives die to risk running RAID-0. > > Prakash Jim.