[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

RE: [K12OSN] ReiserFS vs ext3 ?

There was an article on this topic
http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html a month or so ago that gave a
side-by-side comparison
under a variety of "stress tests" on ext2, ext3, reiser, XFS and
JFS...and the results
really were shocking as ext2 actually outperformed both reiser and ext3
in 1 or 2 of the tests.  Most of the
other "winning results" were split between ext3 and reiser, depending on
what specificially was being done,
reading small vs. large chunks of data, moving data from 1 location to
another, deleting data, etc...


-----Original Message-----
From: k12osn-bounces redhat com [mailto:k12osn-bounces redhat com] On
Behalf Of Eric Harrison
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 9:26 PM
To: robark telus net; Support list for opensource software in schools.
Subject: Re: [K12OSN] ReiserFS vs ext3 ?

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Robert Arkiletian wrote:

>>From what I've read ReiserFS should be much faster with K12LTSP. 
>>Anyone have
>personal experience using 4.01 (FC1) with ReiserFS ?
>3.1.2 (Redhat 9) does not have ReiserFS.

IIRC, RH9 does have ReiserFS. When you start an install, at the boot
prompt type "linux reiserfs" and it will let you format a partition as
ReiserFS. Same trick works with "linux xfs" and/or "linux jfs" as well
(I can't remember which fs is supported in which distro version)

I've had VERY BAD EXPERIENCES with reiserfs 3... so I personally
discourage people from using it on mission critical partitions. It is
not that reiserfs is unstable or buggy or anything nasty like that, it
is just that if something *DOES* go wrong, it will go *REALLY* wrong.
I've never been successful in recovering a corrupted reiserfs partition.


K12OSN mailing list
K12OSN redhat com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]