1 |
On Fri, 2010-12-31 at 19:12 -0600, Dale wrote: |
2 |
> Alan McKinnon wrote: |
3 |
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 00:27 on Saturday 01 January 2011, Dale did |
4 |
> > opine thusly: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> >>> It's my opinion that reiser is in security-fix-only mode from whoever is |
9 |
> >>> maintaining it. If everything else around it stays the same, the fs will |
10 |
> >>> obviously continue working just as it always did. But the surrounding |
11 |
> >>> system is not stable, it changes rapidly, especially in kernel space, so |
12 |
> >>> the odds are stacked against reiser for bitrot. For all these reasons, I |
13 |
> >>> regretfully switched my own systems over to ext4 some time ago. Rieser |
14 |
> >>> was a good fs whose time has come and gone and I no longer had warm and |
15 |
> >>> fuzzies about the future with it. |
16 |
> >>> |
17 |
> >> I'm not sure I EVER saw a update to reiserfs. I was hoping it was just |
18 |
> >> that good. lol |
19 |
> >> |
20 |
> >> This is also the reason I was considering moving to ext4 or something. |
21 |
> >> How has ext4 been treating you since the switch? I also assume you have |
22 |
> >> UPSs as well? |
23 |
> >> |
24 |
> > It's still early days, but ext4 has been good here on all machines. I don't |
25 |
> > have a UPS (couldn't be bothered really...) so the UPS is the device's |
26 |
> > battery. Which means me doing something really stupid and locking the machine |
27 |
> > up is the most common reason for hard reboots. It survived every time so far. |
28 |
> > |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> |
31 |
> That sounds good. Your situation is not a theory but real and in |
32 |
> practice. We all know what happens to theories. :-( |
33 |
> |
34 |
> Dale |
35 |
> |
36 |
> :-) :-) |
37 |
> |
38 |
|
39 |
As someone who suffered from a rare, but fatal bug in some kernel |
40 |
updates to reiserfs3 which were only fixed in a recent versions, I can |
41 |
say yes, its still being actively maintained. |
42 |
|
43 |
But, I am thinking its time to move on - in particular something that |
44 |
can fsck online (my mythtv and backup archives on reiserfs have to be |
45 |
done offline and its takes hours to do terrabytes!) and still be robust. |
46 |
|
47 |
I use "dirvish" for backups which creates a LOT of hardlinks which can |
48 |
be very hard on a file system. ext2 typically lasts only a few cycles, |
49 |
while ext3 is only a little better even with full journalling. Coupled |
50 |
to the fact neither is very good with power cuts and they are a worst |
51 |
case choice for data security :) |
52 |
|
53 |
Reiserfs3 by contrast is very very good, with only a few instances of |
54 |
problems over many years (since beore 3 was even in the kernel) - none |
55 |
of which have lost critical data or file systems (ext2/3 devs, are you |
56 |
listening :) Even the "slowpath" bug I ran into just required a kernel |
57 |
downgrade and an fsck until later kernel versions fixed the bug. |
58 |
|
59 |
I am now trying btrfs and am very impressed. On line fsck is wonderful |
60 |
and I have had one instace of corruption due to a flakey hard disk - the |
61 |
partition is on lvm so I moved it to another disk in the array and its |
62 |
been solid since - didnt lose it or any any data. The dirvish backups |
63 |
are fast enough (impression only, no timings) but large scale deleted |
64 |
(60Gb copies of laptops etc) are much slower than reiserfs. My only |
65 |
"glitch" has been dirvish/btrfs inability to deal with a ".gvfs" file in |
66 |
some home directories - it has some wierd permissions but an exclusion |
67 |
from the backup regime bypasses it. reiserfs doesn't have a problem |
68 |
with it. |
69 |
|
70 |
So, for me at least, btrfs is looking like the way forward. Its in |
71 |
"testing" at the moment, but I am ready to move whole systems over to |
72 |
it. |
73 |
|
74 |
BillK |
75 |
|
76 |
|
77 |
|
78 |
-- |
79 |
William Kenworthy <billk@×××××××××.au> |
80 |
Home in Perth! |