Re: Best file system
On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 18:09 +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Mustafa Kutsal Ay <master@iplikci.com> [2006.02.01.1738 +0100]:
> > there is another option you can choose is reisefs (my fav)
>
> I have suffered massive data loss with reiserfs and heard many
> complain about similar problems. I strongly suggest *not* to use
> reiserfs.
When?
Reiser has a bad reputation that I think was earned because it was the
first journaling filesystem for Linux... it was the software that blazed
the trail for them in Linux, making it the first to hit and have to fix
every problem. As a result there were many early version combinations of
reiser and linux that were definitely broken, and there are plenty of
war stories from people hurt using it in the early days.
However, now it is the most mature Journaling filesystem on Linux.
People argue that XFS is more mature; true it is older, but not on
Linux. People argue that ext3 is a simple extension to ext2 and hence
benefits from its maturity; true, but it's still new code with new
functionality.
My gut feeling from lurking on lists is Reiser has more bad stories
overall, but ext3 has more **recent** bad stories. For some reason I
don't hear much about XFS at all... either no-one is using it or it just
works.
--
Donovan Baarda <abo@minkirri.apana.org.au>
http://minkirri.apana.org.au/~abo/
Reply to: