Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jean-Michel Smith <jsmith@××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o, Alexander Gretencord <arutha@×××.de>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] reiserfs
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 10:34:30
Message-Id: 200205141039.19317.jsmith@kcco.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] reiserfs by Alexander Gretencord
1 On Tuesday 14 May 2002 10:07 am, Alexander Gretencord wrote:
2
3 > Well, many people have run it without problems. SuSE even ships it with
4 > their distribution since ages (before it got into the main kernel tree).
5 > Without an explanation _why_ you think it's not stable enough the statement
6 > is worth nothing. So ACK, this definately needs an entry.
7
8 First, an appeal to authority (Suse in this case) is a logical fallacy you
9 should not engage in. Just because Suse ships reiser with their distribution
10 doesn't make it stable or safe for production use.
11
12 In fact, a friend of mine who runs a computer consultancy, and uses Suse in
13 nearly all of his installations, was bitten very badly by a reiserfs bug that
14 resulted in near-catastrophic data loss. I say near, because he was able to
15 recover from backup tapes. Nevertheless it resulted in an allnighter getting
16 the system back up, on a more reliable ext2 filesystem, followed by several
17 days work as he moved other installations off of reiser and onto ext2 (his
18 choice, not mine ... I probably would have opted for JFS or ext3 in his
19 particular case).
20
21 I have personally witnessed data loss using reiser on numerous occasions ...
22 symptoms ranged from strange "undeletable" files that were corrupt, to entire
23 directory trees vanishing for no apparent reason (but the disk usage
24 remaining unchanged). No recovery was possible in either case (short of
25 reconstructing a new filesystem from scratch and restoring from backups).
26
27 In all these cases all of us had all been using reiserfs "for months with no
28 problems" ... and we still suffered severe data loss.
29
30 Reiserfs is NOT ready for production use, and the gentoo FAQ is both wise and
31 friendly for pointing that out and guiding people away from that particular
32 folly.
33
34 There are plenty of other, much safer filesystems to use, including XFS (if
35 you don't need bleeding edge experimental features, e.g. can be happy with
36 stock 2.4.18 kernel + xfs patches), JFS, ext3, ext2 (no journalling), and so
37 forth. I know people tend to get very emotionally attached to whatever
38 filesystem they like, but this IMHO is unwise ... one should be very agnostic
39 about what fs one chooses to use, rather than defending a particular choice
40 "to the death" as seems so common with software these days.
41
42 That having been said, there is a plethora of hard evidence as well as
43 anectdotal experiences to learn from, and to indicate that reiser really
44 isn't a safe choice to be making. This is reflected in the gentoo
45 installation documentation, IMHO exactly as it should be.
46
47 Jean.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] reiserfs Mark Bainter <mark-gt@×××××.org>
Re: [gentoo-dev] reiserfs Alexander Gretencord <arutha@×××.de>