reiser4

[David T Hollis]

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 10:22 -0600, Stephen J Smoogen wrote:
> Naoki wrote:
> > This had to be asked sooner or later.  Any plans on reiser4, or do we 
> > wait until it's in the standard kernel?
> > 
> 
> Since Fedora is trying to aim for no extra patches.. :) I think it is an 
> upstream issue..
> 
> 
I'm sure the ultimate question is: when/if it makes it to the stock
kernel, does Fedora begin to support it?  There are those camps that
feel that RedHat has some agenda against reiserfs3/4 for some reason and
intentionally crippled it in the past so people wouldn't use it.
Myself, I doubt that.  Having followed Reiser4 development for some
months now (hey, the marketing makes it sound really slick!), I
definitely have come to many reservations before I would go anywhere
near it with important data.  While I'm not trying to start any kind of
flame war, things that make the hair on my neck stand up are the fact
that when they tried to move their production Apache box to Reiser4 a
few months back, it wouldn't go due to (IIRC) a send_file issue between
Apache and reiser.  For a long time, their equivalent of fsck did
nothing at all (that's pretty much exactly what it said when you ran
it).  From what I see, fsck's aren't supposed to be as critical with
reiser as some other filesystems, but they could certainly have had it
do some basic checks or something instead of failing all of the time
(which naturally borked initscripts....).

Anyway, everyones mileage may very but I would advise not considering
1.0 to be 1.0.  Consider it much more of a "ok, it's out there and seems
to work for certain people in certain situations...."  Let it simmer for
a bit and follow it's progress through the -mm kernels before you put it
in a test environment.  Wait even longer before going production.

This may sound like I'm rather negative on it, which I'm not.  If it
works as well as it is advertised, it's some seriously cool s&*t and I'd
love to be a major user of it.  I just prefer to let the core kernel
guys muck through it and poke out the holes in it before I come to rely
on it.  Hopefully for all the ensuing traffic will be productive on not
become useless bickering.

-- 
David T Hollis <dhollis at davehollis.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040824/a688552d/attachment.sig>