1 |
On Mittwoch 26 November 2008, Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote: |
2 |
> > I ran ext3 on a dirvish backup server - lasted two days, resierfs is |
3 |
> > still going after a couple of years. dirvish REALLY hammers a file |
4 |
> > system. |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > Participating in a few of these discussions over the years has brought |
7 |
> > home to me that YMMV really does apply to filesystems. Your usage, data |
8 |
> > profile, power/hardware stability are all variables and any two peoples |
9 |
> > experience almost assuredly wont be the same. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> In this discussion multiple people have defended reiserfs as a safe |
12 |
> filesystem. This is novel to me. Reiserfs is always bashed as being an |
13 |
> unsafe filesystem, developed with only speed in mind; a filesystem to |
14 |
> be used only by childish ricers or in specific situations where |
15 |
> filesystem performance is critical. For example, once I tried |
16 |
> genkernel (but did not like it and decide to go on with manual kernel |
17 |
> maintainance) and this message was in an ewarn |
18 |
> ewarn "This package is known to not work with reiser4. If you |
19 |
> are running" |
20 |
> ewarn "reiser4 and have a problem, do not file a bug. We know it does |
21 |
> not" ewarn "work and we don't plan on fixing it since reiser4 is the one |
22 |
> that is" ewarn "broken in this regard. Try using a sane filesystem like |
23 |
> ext3 or" ewarn "even reiser3." |
24 |
|
25 |
reiser4 and reiserfs are two completly unrelated file systems. |
26 |
|
27 |
reiserfs is the oldest journaling fs for linux. It had been broken in early |
28 |
2.4 development by careless vm patches which weren't tested prior to |
29 |
inclusion. This early breakage still haunts reiserfs. |
30 |
|
31 |
If you look at lkml, there are regularly reports about problems with ext3 and |
32 |
xfs. But very few with reiserfs - and none with jfs because nobody is using |
33 |
it. |
34 |
|
35 |
|
36 |
> They explicitly claim reiser4 is broken and insane, and their wording |
37 |
> implicitly suggests that ext3 is better than reiser3. |
38 |
|
39 |
And I claim that genkernel is a broken piece of shit, so what? |
40 |
ext3 has enough problems - look at lkml. After that you might rethink claims |
41 |
that ext3 is 'stable'. |
42 |
|
43 |
> |
44 |
> But in this discussion people are saying reiserfs is in fact safer than |
45 |
> ext3. |
46 |
|
47 |
experience. Obervation. I haven't seen reiserfs problems that were not the |
48 |
hardware's fault. |
49 |
|
50 |
> |
51 |
> I have not dived in the Linux developers x Hans Reiser battle, so I |
52 |
> don't know which side is right and which side is guilty, but think |
53 |
> that either |
54 |
|
55 |
Hans Reiser has zero people skills and clashed with people who also have zero |
56 |
people skills. Add some misunderstandings (like plugins - they aren't |
57 |
plugins), a fat 'it is not developed here' syndrom and some bias and you get a |
58 |
nice explosive mess. |
59 |
HR is completly out of the picture. Edward is doing reiser4 development today |
60 |
and he is doing a good job. |
61 |
|
62 |
|
63 |
> A) reiserfs is a good filesystem, but the battle between Hans Reiser |
64 |
> and Linux developers caused people to dislike reiserfs for |
65 |
> non-technical reasons. |
66 |
|
67 |
reiserfs is a good filesystem that was broken by third parties. Btw, some days |
68 |
ago Nick Piggin broke reiser4 in -mm. And instead of fixing it, they disabled |
69 |
reiser4. Which tells you a lot about the 'if you have something in kernel, it |
70 |
will be fixed when changes break it' lie. |
71 |
|
72 |
> or |
73 |
> B) reiserfs is a bad filesystem but for some reason a lot of reiserfs |
74 |
> fans appeared in this thread |
75 |
|
76 |
reiserfs is a stable filesystem. For ages no new features have been added. |
77 |
Unlike ext3 only bug fixes have been went in. The problem is, that redhat was |
78 |
behind ext3 - and redhat pushs all their stuff, while agressively attacking |
79 |
everything not made by them. |
80 |
|
81 |
|
82 |
> Note: don't talk about the unfortunate horrible story of Hans' family, |
83 |
> the details of which we don't know. People were bashing reiserfs (both |
84 |
> versions 3 and 4) well before that. |
85 |
|
86 |
because they don't understand either. reiser4 has tons of nice and good ideas |
87 |
- but some people saw Reiser's name and went beserk. |