[Ilugc] FC3 (was: reiser 4 vs xfs)
- From: deepak.sarda@xxxxxxxxx (Deepak Sarda)
- Date: Thu Jan 20 14:58:33 2005
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:03:10 +0530 (IST), Sivasankar Chander
<siva@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't know, but Reiser4 doesn't have the reputation
of being industrial-strength. OTOH, I haven't lost a
single byte of data over the last 4 years with ext3 -
so I'm staying with ext3 until significant performance
advantages, combined with industrial-strength reliability,
are seen in xfs, reiser4, etc.
I do not understand why you are comparing ext3 with reiser4. Reiser4
is new and of course needs more real world testing before 'mission
critical' data can be entrusted to it.
A fair comparison would be to compare ext3 with reiserfs (ver3).
I've always used Reiserfs since mandrake started using is as default.
I've never lost data to it due to corruption. The one time I did lose
data, it was my own 'rm -rf' mistake :)
This brings me to another question asked here:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:26:36 -0800 (PST), ram
<ramprasad_rajendran@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've got one doubt here.
Then does it mean that u cannot recover files on a
resierfs when the system has been improperly shutdown
You can certainly expect to recover files from an improper shutdown -
that's what a journalized file system is all about. Without getting
into technicalities, IMO Ext3 is no better than Reiserfs at handling
improper shutdowns. Does that sound too negative? What I mean is that
both are good at handling improper shutdowns.. but it's not like ext3
does it better than reiserfs.
The one thing that ReiserFS doesn't support is 'undelete' as I found
out after an inadvertant 'rm -rf' I wrote a mini-howto to recover
data for reiserfs:
http://www.antrix.net/journal/techtalk/reiserfs_data_recovery_howto.comments
Deepak.
PS: Wasn't the thread about reiser4 vs xfs? :)
--
http://eminor.antrix.net/
Other related posts: