| 1 |
On 05/11/14 16:53, Mick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Saturday 10 May 2014 10:33:19 William Kenworthy wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Note that as I said in my original |
| 4 |
>> email, "dirvish" really hammers a file system and only reiserfs seems to |
| 5 |
>> withstand it though I have gotten errors with it in the past. Ive tried |
| 6 |
>> ext4 (takes only a couple of backup sessions and its unrecoverable, |
| 7 |
>> btrfs an occasional error with two complete losses of the |
| 8 |
>> partition/filesystem since Christmas and reiserfs gets rare errors. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I moved away from reisefs to ext4 because I was getting some random lockups |
| 12 |
> when I/O was high. While on reiserfs I also had a couple of corrupt mysql |
| 13 |
> files and all around poor performance. Now, this was on a machine with a |
| 14 |
> deficient PSU (I replaced a couple of capacitors since then and it is now |
| 15 |
> working properly) so I don't want to blame the filesystem because of this |
| 16 |
> hardware problem. In any case, under these impaired conditions ext4 was a |
| 17 |
> much better performing filesystem than reiserfs. No lock ups, significantly |
| 18 |
> faster and no corruption was observed in normal operation - I didn't try to |
| 19 |
> hammer it. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> So I read your paragraph above with surprise, because in my experience the |
| 22 |
> opposite was true. At the time I thought that reiserfs was perhaps suffering |
| 23 |
> from bitrot, because these symptoms had gotten worse over time. This is on an |
| 24 |
> installation running since 2005. Not sure what to conclude from these |
| 25 |
> anecdotal observations ... :-/ |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Everyone's use case and experience with filesystems seems a bit |
| 29 |
different. One reason I am moving from reiserfs is bitrot - I can see |
| 30 |
that reiserfs is losing favour. btrfs has potential ... |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
BillK |
Archives