Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, vmstech wrote:
People I know who've used Reiser say it's wonderfuly fast, but if it
corrupts, well... save your time, and go straight to restoring your backups.
ReiserFS does seems just like the ducksnuts in terms of performance, but it seems to have accumulated some horror stories along the way: http://www.linuxsa.org.au/pipermail/linuxsa/2002-January/038035.html
Marcs being runing it for 5 years, no issues - any one else using it?
I've been using it for many years. At home, no issues.
We used to have lots of severe corruption issues at work on production servers with ext2/ext3 (and a few with xfs). We switched to reiserfs and no more issues. Not just a few servers either.
So i'd say quoting horror stories from 2002 definitely no longer applies. Its like quoting horror stories about kernel 2.4 (same time frame). And about as relevant :-)
-Dan
I've installed it on about 30 servers with no problems at all. I think there was one release of the kernel in 2002 thar had a reiser bug, but I never used that one.
If you were running a few big files I'd say use ext3. But when it comes to lots of little files like maildir you're looking at like a 10x speed increaes.
-- Marc Perkel - marc@perkel.com
Spam Filter: http://www.junkemailfilter.com My Blog: http://marc.perkel.com