[opensuse] Ext3 vs Reiser FS
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past. I have two 500 GB SATA II drives. My programs do lots of file I/O and can generate files as large as 15-20 GB in some of my scientific applications. Any advice you could give is greatly appreciated. Buddy Coffey Applied Research Associates Computational and Applied Electromagnetics -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead! If you have many large files, do XFS, ext3 is also fine. Frank -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 10 September 2007 07:05, Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
No, his wife is.
If you have many large files, do XFS, ext3 is also fine.
Actually, that's fine. I've had no issues on 10.2 running ext3 on my systems. In fact, I've noticed a slight improvement in file access, however that's just a SOTP feeling. -- kai ponte www.perfectreign.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
If you have many large files, do XFS, ext3 is also fine.
On my personal experience, I had better results with large files using reiserfs rather than XFS. Regards. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 10 September 2007, Kai Ponte wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007 07:05, Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
No, his wife is.
Maybe. Maybe not. Nobody (of us) knows. Having good (well: a lot of) expertise in media I don't believe a single word I read or hear in the news. Regarding reiserfs: I still use it, it survived several sudden power-downs, I'm happy with it, having countless text, photo and tar.gz files from some Kilobytes up to hundreds of MB's. Don't know, if that's very efficient, but it's fast and it works reliably (knock on wood). I'm just confused by the discussions I read here on this list. But apart from personal beliefs I havn't read a lot of helpful postings in this regard here, regrettably. It sometimes reminds me of the Win-Linux discussions (mine is better than yours, nyaaah nyaaah nyaaah) Well, some were serious, I must admit... Daniel -- Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Switzerland professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com erotic art photos: http://www.bauer-nudes.com/en/linux.html Madagascar special: http://www.fotograf-basel.ch/madagascar/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Daniel Bauer wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007, Kai Ponte wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007 07:05, Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past. reiserfs is dead!
Not entirely, Reiserfs 3x is finished and is not going to receive further development. Reiserfs 4x is not complete, *but* the jury is still out on whether, and how much, development is currently taking place. see http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html and http://www.namesys.com/install_v4.html
No, his wife is.
Maybe. Maybe not. Nobody (of us) knows.
Having good (well: a lot of) expertise in media I don't believe a single word I read or hear in the news.
Regarding reiserfs:
I still use it, it survived several sudden power-downs, I'm happy with it, having countless text, photo and tar.gz files from some Kilobytes up to hundreds of MB's. Don't know, if that's very efficient, but it's fast and it works reliably (knock on wood).
Me too. I would add 'at least 100' sudden power-downs and I have never lost a single file. Additional Me Too of (knock on wood)
I'm just confused by the discussions I read here on this list. But apart from personal beliefs I havn't read a lot of helpful postings in this regard here, regrettably. It sometimes reminds me of the Win-Linux discussions (mine is better than yours, nyaaah nyaaah nyaaah)
Well, some were serious, I must admit...
Daniel
see also: http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html on the large/small file advantages/disadvantages. I have used both and for my use I have no complaints about either.. -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 (936) 715-9333 (936) 715-9339 fax www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Montag, 10. September 2007, David C. Rankin wrote:
Daniel Bauer wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007, Kai Ponte wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007 07:05, Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
Not entirely, Reiserfs 3x is finished and is not going to receive further development. Reiserfs 4x is not complete, *but* the jury is still out on whether, and how much, development is currently taking place.
You're right. not entirely but nearly entirely. It receives no further development, also no bugfixes and performance improvements for actual hardware. Reiser4 (not Reiserfs 4) will never be completed! Hmmm maybe at the same time when Hurd is released! ;-)
see http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html and http://www.namesys.com/install_v4.html
No, his wife is.
Who? The wife of reiserfs? Or does he mean Hans Reisers wife? Anyway ...
Maybe. Maybe not. Nobody (of us) knows. Having good (well: a lot of) expertise in media I don't believe a single word I read or hear in the news.
I don't care about if Hans Reisers wife is dead or not, but at the moment he has some trouble and no one pushes Reiser4. But we are talking about reiserfs, not Reiser4.
Regarding reiserfs:
Me too: Reiserfs has performance problems with extended attributes and does not scale on SMP-Machines because of global kernel locks. And we will see more of this multicore system day by day. http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2006-09/msg00542.html So my opinion: reiserfs is dead! And i've never seen Reiser4 in a productive environment. But that is the one we want to have, or maybe ZFS. For example, Fefes benchmarks shows incredible performance with reiser4. But ... you know, it has not been released yet and is unstable ... Frank -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2007-09-11 at 08:17 +0200, Frank Fiene wrote:
You're right. not entirely but nearly entirely. It receives no further development, also no bugfixes and performance improvements for actual hardware.
Wrong. It does receive bugfixes. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5ob4tTMYHG2NR9URAngRAJ97K4uEyykPHcUPAZsgCWlI+LlRHwCePwNt r0tD1gU1o7bqk/nugRx1gto= =bBbm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
David C. Rankin wrote:
Daniel Bauer wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007, Kai Ponte wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007 07:05, Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
Not entirely, Reiserfs 3x is finished and is not going to receive further development. Reiserfs 4x is not complete, *but* the jury is still out on whether, and how much, development is currently taking place.
see http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html and http://www.namesys.com/install_v4.html
No, his wife is.
Maybe. Maybe not. Nobody (of us) knows.
Having good (well: a lot of) expertise in media I don't believe a single word I read or hear in the news.
Regarding reiserfs:
I still use it, it survived several sudden power-downs, I'm happy with it, having countless text, photo and tar.gz files from some Kilobytes up to hundreds of MB's. Don't know, if that's very efficient, but it's fast and it works reliably (knock on wood).
Me too. I would add 'at least 100' sudden power-downs and I have never lost a single file. Additional Me Too of (knock on wood)
I'm just confused by the discussions I read here on this list. But apart from personal beliefs I havn't read a lot of helpful postings in this regard here, regrettably. It sometimes reminds me of the Win-Linux discussions (mine is better than yours, nyaaah nyaaah nyaaah)
Well, some were serious, I must admit...
Daniel
see also: http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html on the large/small file advantages/disadvantages.
This another great Link: http://linuxgazette.net/122/piszcz.html
I have used both and for my use I have no complaints about either..
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Regarding reiserfs:
I still use it, it survived several sudden power-downs, I'm happy with it, having countless text, photo and tar.gz files from some Kilobytes up to hundreds of MB's. Don't know, if that's very efficient, but it's fast and it works reliably (knock on wood).
This is why I have used reiserfs up until now. I used to use ext2 (SUSE6.x days) and had real problems. That kind of put me off ext anything (logical or not, it is the reaction I had). I moved over to reiserfs and had flawless performance ever since.. over power losses, friends hitting the off switch because that's how they power down Windows, flaky power supplies... and so on. All along , reiserfs has worked. That said... for reasons discussed here... like scaling.. I am seriously considering a change. I wish ZFS was ready to go on Linux :-P That would be my top choice. It's so fast on Solaris... and robust as well. C. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
If so, doesn't it strike you as odd that reiserfs is still the default in suse enterprise? No, reiserfs is not dead, we're still running it on our newest laptop installs as well as the mission critical sles servers in the data center. There does seem to be a general consensus that reiserfs is strictly in maintenance mode though. Joe -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
Yes, and I was burned by reiserfs a couple times. My next upgrade, I converted to ext3 and xfs. Despite several power-failures (in Iraq during generator maintenance), I never lost a single file with ext3 and xfs. Here is my system: $ mount | grep / /dev/sda5 on / type ext3 (rw,acl,user_xattr) /dev/sda6 on /usr type xfs (rw) /dev/sda7 on /var type xfs (rw) /dev/sda8 on /opt type xfs (rw) /dev/sda11 on /home type xfs (rw) /dev/sda9 on /tmp type xfs (rw) /dev/sdb1 on /windows/c type ntfs (ro,noexec,nosuid,nodev,gid=100,umask=0002,nls=utf8) proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) udev on /dev type tmpfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,mode=0620,gid=5) securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2007-09-10 at 14:25 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
My next upgrade, I converted to ext3 and xfs. Despite several power-failures (in Iraq during generator maintenance), I never lost a single file with ext3 and xfs.
I have an XFS home partition completely hosed. The xfs_repair tool crashes on it. I haven't reformated it yet, in the hope they solve the bug before next century. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5ffGtTMYHG2NR9URAp85AJwMYooi7t4tre2HKGkXmCyCphi9hACeJ+4a +GGsoCijTyBR3NR1Je8xHAY= =dwSg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 10 September 2007 19:25, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
Yes, and I was burned by reiserfs a couple times.
My next upgrade, I converted to ext3 and xfs. Despite several power-failures (in Iraq during generator maintenance), I never lost a single file with ext3 and xfs.
Here is my system: $ mount | grep / /dev/sda5 on / type ext3 (rw,acl,user_xattr) /dev/sda6 on /usr type xfs (rw) /dev/sda7 on /var type xfs (rw) /dev/sda8 on /opt type xfs (rw) /dev/sda11 on /home type xfs (rw) /dev/sda9 on /tmp type xfs (rw) /dev/sdb1 on /windows/c type ntfs (ro,noexec,nosuid,nodev,gid=100,umask=0002,nls=utf8) proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) udev on /dev type tmpfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,mode=0620,gid=5) securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw)
I hope I haven't missed this elsewhere, but I'd be interested to know if there are special reasons why you've used ext3 on / and xfs on your other Linux partitions - just as a pointer next time I'm setting up a disk. Cheers Fergus -- Fergus Wilde Chetham's Library Long Millgate Manchester M3 1SB Tel: 0161 834 7961 Fax: 0161 839 5797 http://www.chethams.org.uk -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2007-09-11 at 08:44 +0100, Fergus Wilde wrote:
I hope I haven't missed this elsewhere, but I'd be interested to know if there are special reasons why you've used ext3 on / and xfs on your other Linux partitions - just as a pointer next time I'm setting up a disk.
Ext3 is very stable, standard, and easy to repair: a good choice for root.. Xfs has good tools for imaging a partition for backup, for instance. Good for /home. Just look at the available tools: xfs xfs_bmap xfs_copy xfs_freeze xfs_info xfs_logprint xfs_ncheck xfs_repair xfsinfo xfs_admin xfs_check xfs_db xfs_growfs xfs_io xfs_mkfile xfs_quota xfs_rtcp - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5oo0tTMYHG2NR9URAopSAJ43qgoadwN4SOg7fbtrbmxRzfHRQACcCgtc i936nvYVKx0esOEOJ69uibs= =Zi0+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Ext3 is very stable, standard, and easy to repair
the worst problem I had was with ext3. But this don't mean ext3 is not reliable.. Whatever you make a file system, failure of electricity at the wrong moment can give loss. non hardware related problems (for example for UPS saved computers) are more important but seems to be very rare... jdd -- http://www.dodin.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Fergus Wilde wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007 19:25, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Frank Fiene wrote:
On Montag, 10. September 2007, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
reiserfs is dead!
Yes, and I was burned by reiserfs a couple times.
My next upgrade, I converted to ext3 and xfs. Despite several power-failures (in Iraq during generator maintenance), I never lost a single file with ext3 and xfs.
Here is my system: $ mount | grep / /dev/sda5 on / type ext3 (rw,acl,user_xattr) /dev/sda6 on /usr type xfs (rw) /dev/sda7 on /var type xfs (rw) /dev/sda8 on /opt type xfs (rw) /dev/sda11 on /home type xfs (rw) /dev/sda9 on /tmp type xfs (rw) /dev/sdb1 on /windows/c type ntfs (ro,noexec,nosuid,nodev,gid=100,umask=0002,nls=utf8) proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) udev on /dev type tmpfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,mode=0620,gid=5) securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw)
I hope I haven't missed this elsewhere, but I'd be interested to know if there are special reasons why you've used ext3 on / and xfs on your other Linux partitions - just as a pointer next time I'm setting up a disk.
Because I didn't have the time or inclination to figure out how to get Linux to boot off of an XFS file system(*), AND because with the partitioning shown above, the / file system has VERY LITTLE write activity (only when I change a configuration file of upgrade software) (*) I'm not sure if it's even possible to boot from XFS. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2007-09-11 at 13:48 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
(*) I'm not sure if it's even possible to boot from XFS.
Same as with reiserfs: the driver(s) goes to the initrd file. In the worst case, you simply add the traditional small /boot partition in ext2/3. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG57uptTMYHG2NR9URArzHAJ0RC4eeg6RqUb4GKAQTmKV9ZdDoPQCfaGC/ d5Wqz50cz8lAGAH2lbUhNY8= =hHTi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 09/12/2007 06:12 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Tuesday 2007-09-11 at 13:48 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
(*) I'm not sure if it's even possible to boot from XFS.
Same as with reiserfs: the driver(s) goes to the initrd file. In the worst case, you simply add the traditional small /boot partition in ext2/3.
The initrd modules are actually for the kernel to handle the file system. To boot, grub needs to be able to read it, and a look at /boot/grub in 10.2 reveals there is an xfs_stage1_5 file, which gives grub the ability AFAIK to read xfs partitions to boot from. At least, that is my understanding. -- Joe Morris Registered Linux user 231871 running openSUSE 10.2 x86_64 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
I've used ReiserFS on . . oh, probably nearly 100 computers in the past decade, and I've never had a FS failure that was the fault of ReiserFS - I've lost data on ReiserFS drives only due to: 1) Bad memory (most common) 2) Dying hard drives (would have died no matter what FS) 3) Dying mainboards (verified by the fact that various parts of the system fried and then things got worse after that) On the otherhand I have had ext2 and ext3 do weird things even during "normal" use. And I can't stand the periodic fscheck. Several years ago when ext2 was the only way to go, a kernel hacker, I believe it was Daniel Phillips, started a file system named "Tux2". It was the end-all be-all of file systems: It was designed to handle any problems. He said you'd be able to just power off your computer with the power switch instead of halting and unmounting the disks and everything would be fine. I emailed him about it a few years ago, asking if he was still working on it, and his response was that he quit working on it because ReiserFS had taken over the task and was going to work out just as good or better. I wish I could get ahold of him and ask him what he thinks now. I tried searching the web for him and can't find a current email address. I don't want to ask on the lkm, I'll probably get flamed :-) Hopefully either a) Someone will continue Reiser4 or b) ext4 will solve all these problems someday. I hope ext4 is not another "upgrade" on top of ext2/3 the way ext3 was for ext2. I sure wish /someone/ would write one good file system that can be trusted, fast, stable, and no fsck or other wait timeout on booting. The whole FS thing has been a pain for years. JW -- ---------------------- System Administrator - Cedar Creek Software http://www.cedarcreeksoftware.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Jonathan Wilson wrote:
I sure wish /someone/ would write one good file system that can be trusted, fast, stable, and no fsck or other wait timeout on booting. The whole FS thing has been a pain for years.
I've heard some talk on lkml of making ocfs2 the default linux fs at some point. Joe -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
I sure wish /someone/ would write one good file system that can be trusted, fast, stable, and no fsck or other wait timeout on booting. The whole FS thing has been a pain for years.
zfs is pretty slick... if Sun would ever get around to changing the CDDL license, or writing a Linux port.... http://zfs-on-fuse.blogspot.com/ http://www.linuxinsight.com/zfs_filesystem_for_linux.html http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2007/061807-zfs-on-linux.html C -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2007-09-12 at 14:37 -0500, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
I've used ReiserFS on . . oh, probably nearly 100 computers in the past decade, and I've never had a FS failure that was the fault of ReiserFS - I've lost data on ReiserFS drives only due to:
I have, due to a software bug in the reiserfs code. A name clash. It is on record on this list some years ago. Also, I have an unrecoverable XFS partition due to a bug in the xfs code. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG6Fk3tTMYHG2NR9URAkDVAJ93yWVO7iQ0XtGhjs4Re7NecyB33wCfTUl4 pg9rYra2yognAj67BMWB9pg= =DCXT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Jonathan Wilson wrote:
I've used ReiserFS on . .
please, read the document quoted before here http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse/2007-09/msg00846.html here the document, thanks to Rajko http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf it's ling but really worth reading as it answers all the questions asked here jdd -- http://www.dodin.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2007-09-10 at 10:03 -0400, bcoffey@ wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
The reiserfs will likely not get improvements, that's all. If it has worked for you in the past, you can just keep using it as safely as before. I use it. The reasons for yast offering ext3 by default were posted here time ago by the person making the decission. I don't have the link handy.
I have two 500 GB SATA II drives. My programs do lots of file I/O and can generate files as large as 15-20 GB in some of my scientific applications.
You could also consider xfs, it's very god for large files. Even better, test your application with both types of filesystem, and then decide. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5XT6tTMYHG2NR9URAil0AJ9BZ2kyqbypB9ZyuMZK1W8zGZzGkgCfUevj 1KqGZZ0J5JCPOwyML9sya7Q= =9bIP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
<snip>
You could also consider xfs, it's very god for large files. Even better, test your application with both types of filesystem, and then decide.
What size do you consider large files to be? I do a lot of digital photography and have loads of files around 10MB. TIA, Jim -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 10 September 2007 09:48, Jim Sabatke wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
<snip>
You could also consider xfs, it's very god for large files. Even better, test your application with both types of filesystem, and then decide.
What size do you consider large files to be? I do a lot of digital photography and have loads of files around 10MB.
The "large" that the SGI folks had in mind when they designed XFS was files used in the production of animated feature films of the Pixar variety. By those standards (as well as by others considerably more typical for a desktop system), 10 MB is certainly not large, these days. But I do remember my first 20 MB hard drive for my Mac. What a phenomenal improvement that was over diskettes (even with the precious external drive). Ah, the good old days.
TIA,
Jim
Randall Schulz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Randall R Schulz wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2007 09:48, Jim Sabatke wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
<snip>
You could also consider xfs, it's very god for large files. Even better, test your application with both types of filesystem, and then decide.
What size do you consider large files to be? I do a lot of digital photography and have loads of files around 10MB.
The "large" that the SGI folks had in mind when they designed XFS was files used in the production of animated feature films of the Pixar variety.
By those standards (as well as by others considerably more typical for a desktop system), 10 MB is certainly not large, these days.
But I do remember my first 20 MB hard drive for my Mac. What a phenomenal improvement that was over diskettes (even with the precious external drive). Ah, the good old days.
TIA,
Jim
Randall Schulz
Thanks to everyone who responded. I've decided to go with ext3 and feel more confident doing so after reading the comments everyone has posted. Buddy Coffey Applied Research Associates Computational and Applied Electromagnetics -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Monday 2007-09-10 at 10:03 -0400, bcoffey@ wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
The reiserfs will likely not get improvements, that's all. If it has worked for you in the past, you can just keep using it as safely as before. I use it.
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash. Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
Dunno, but I think there must have been something else going on there. Maybe you were running an old version, or you were running it on some old redhat 2.4 kernel (which I've seen problems with) FWIW reiserfs as shipped by suse has been a trooper for us, a rock star of the data center as it were. It wouldn't be shipped with SLES if it were flaky. Those stuffy Swiss bankers have a low tolerance for bugs, you know. When we building some big new servers a year or so ago, I did some benchmarks on ext2, ext3, reiserfs, jfs and xfs. ext3 had some real performance issues, xfs showed very consistent performance, and jfs had modest performance, but the lowest cpu usage. For sheer i/o speed, ext2 was the winner, with reiserfs coming in second, far ahead of the rest of the pack. Joe -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
joe wrote:
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
Dunno, but I think there must have been something else going on there. Maybe you were running an old version, or you were running it on some old redhat 2.4 kernel (which I've seen problems with)
This was the final Reiser 3.x on Suse 9.3
FWIW reiserfs as shipped by suse has been a trooper for us, a rock star of the data center as it were. It wouldn't be shipped with SLES if it were flaky. Those stuffy Swiss bankers have a low tolerance for bugs, you know.
Regardless, in my actual experience, it's not nearly as trustworthy as XFS or ext3. And the Reiser was on a system with genuine IBM SCSI disks -- the highest available quality at the time, so the corruption and losses can't be blamed on the hard drives. When I upgraded (Suse 9.2 to Suse 9.3) and got rid of the ReiserFS, I suffered no more data losses or corruption following crashes and power-glitches.
When we building some big new servers a year or so ago, I did some benchmarks on ext2, ext3, reiserfs, jfs and xfs. ext3 had some real performance issues, xfs showed very consistent performance, and jfs had modest performance, but the lowest cpu usage. For sheer i/o speed, ext2 was the winner, with reiserfs coming in second, far ahead of the rest of the pack.
Joe
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2007-09-10 at 14:30 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
I have completely lost partitions in reiserfs, ext3, and xfs. All three of them. Lots of lost data. And I keep using the three of them. But I will not swear by any of them. I just make backups, because I know I will loose data again. I don't know when, I simply know I will. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5flutTMYHG2NR9URArYSAJ9vr1+/CulI9qFu3AxvP1IzbAcrPwCdHfSw HQalhXQsBkL/E7ZuhMJzB2I= =7YMF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Monday 2007-09-10 at 14:30 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
I have completely lost partitions in reiserfs, ext3, and xfs. All three of them. Lots of lost data.
And I keep using the three of them. But I will not swear by any of them. I just make backups, because I know I will loose data again. I don't know when, I simply know I will.
This is really FS independent, this will happen on whatever software, hardware, and FS one uses. What would be useful is a real world MTF (mean time to failure) stat as well as performance stats, so one can make decisions about real world reliability as well as performance. What we have is a lot of anecdotal information, but very little one can pin numbers on. As for ext3 until someone fixes the truly appalling performance of the consistency checks (and the default behaviour of firing up those checks periodically), I am sticking with reiser. - -- ============================================================================== I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. Bjarne Stroustrup ============================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG5ktKasN0sSnLmgIRAnzsAKDn1vSHVtbJ15nq2SaLENT+nqxA5QCeNXBM vHHExfBBwfCUx8TBXMXvF9Y= =CB+/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 09:01 +0100, G T Smith wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Monday 2007-09-10 at 14:30 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Short of disk failures I been lucky and never lost a filesystem, ext or otherwise. <SNIP> As for ext3 until someone fixes the truly appalling performance of the consistency checks (and the default behaviour of firing up those checks periodically), I am sticking with reiser.
That's one thing that really annoys me. A while ago I changed a production system with about 1.5T storage and since it been over 180 days since last fsck my reboot took almost 1 hour (when I had told the client that a reboot is fast, takes max 15 minutes)
- -- ============================================================================== I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.
Bjarne Stroustrup ============================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG5ktKasN0sSnLmgIRAnzsAKDn1vSHVtbJ15nq2SaLENT+nqxA5QCeNXBM vHHExfBBwfCUx8TBXMXvF9Y= =CB+/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2007-09-11 at 08:08 -0400, Peter Sjoberg wrote:
That's one thing that really annoys me. A while ago I changed a production system with about 1.5T storage and since it been over 180 days since last fsck my reboot took almost 1 hour (when I had told the client that a reboot is fast, takes max 15 minutes)
Yes, that's a known problem of ext3. In your situation, perhaps reiserfs is not ideal, but you could try xfs. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5qZHtTMYHG2NR9URAl69AJ9EUXNOWOvDwHch7ZMAR7DLgmNyFgCfclnX 2LGBKu6rz2myQcQOy6+Y12Y= =Itmg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Peter Sjoberg wrote:
On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 09:01 +0100, G T Smith wrote:
As for ext3 until someone fixes the truly appalling performance of the consistency checks (and the default behaviour of firing up those checks periodically), I am sticking with reiser.
The checks can be disabled (or the interval can be changed) via tune2fs.
That's one thing that really annoys me. A while ago I changed a production system with about 1.5T storage and since it been over 180 days since last fsck my reboot took almost 1 hour (when I had told the client that a reboot is fast, takes max 15 minutes)
Experienced admins use the "fastboot" option under such circumstances. Regards, Th. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2007-09-11 at 09:01 +0100, G T Smith wrote:
I have completely lost partitions in reiserfs, ext3, and xfs. All three of them. Lots of lost data.
And I keep using the three of them. But I will not swear by any of them. I just make backups, because I know I will loose data again. I don't know when, I simply know I will.
This is really FS independent, this will happen on whatever software, hardware, and FS one uses. What would be useful is a real world MTF (mean time to failure) stat as well as performance stats, so one can make decisions about real world reliability as well as performance. What we have is a lot of anecdotal information, but very little one can pin numbers on.
No, I'm talking about real software failures in the filesystem. XFS, for instance: nimrodel:~ # xfs_repair /dev/hdd8 Phase 1 - find and verify superblock... Phase 2 - using internal log ... disconnected dir inode 46144142, moving to lost+found disconnected inode 46170775, moving to lost+found corrupt inode 46170775 (btree). This is a bug. Please report it to xfs@oss.sgi.com. cache_node_purge: refcount was 1, not zero (node=0x82e8af8) fatal error -- 117 - couldn't iget disconnected inode nimrodel:~ # It's on bugzilla. No response. :-( - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG5ojJtTMYHG2NR9URAm3jAJ9E3fYCRZIh5JWjc5gyTzLsV9azdwCgiqMX GqngF+W1oMqnLoh1UvoNu/Q= =CbbN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 10 September 2007 11:30, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Monday 2007-09-10 at 10:03 -0400, bcoffey@ wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
The reiserfs will likely not get improvements, that's all. If it has worked for you in the past, you can just keep using it as safely as before. I use it.
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
In defence of Reiser - what version was that? I had many problems with just the above in 9.3. Once I upgraded to 10.0, the problems went away. Of course, when I build my 10.2 laptop, I am using EXT3. I'm still using Reiser on my upgraded desktops - one of which has been running since 9.1 on Reiser. -- kai ponte www.perfectreign.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 14:30 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Monday 2007-09-10 at 10:03 -0400, bcoffey@ wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
The reiserfs will likely not get improvements, that's all. If it has worked for you in the past, you can just keep using it as safely as before. I use it.
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
I could be mistaken, but i thought the use of xfs inherrently required the use of a no-break power supply, as it holds more data in mem,,,,, Hans
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Hans Witvliet wrote:
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 14:30 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Monday 2007-09-10 at 10:03 -0400, bcoffey@ wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
The reiserfs will likely not get improvements, that's all. If it has worked for you in the past, you can just keep using it as safely as before. I use it.
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
I could be mistaken, but i thought the use of xfs inherrently required the use of a no-break power supply, as it holds more data in mem,,,,,
Both are journalled filesystems, but there seems to be an implementation error in Reiserfs 3.x, because I had several fsck failures after power outages. XFS's journalling mechanism seems (in my experience) to be much closer to the ideal. Other people have experienced losses with XFS, but I'm beginning to believe that those were hardware related (physical defects on the hard drive), which currently, a problem to which currently all filesystems are susceptable.
Hans
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Friday 14 September 2007 00:12, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Hans Witvliet wrote: ....
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
I could be mistaken, but i thought the use of xfs inherrently required the use of a no-break power supply, as it holds more data in mem,,,,,
Both are journalled filesystems, but there seems to be an implementation error in Reiserfs 3.x, because I had several fsck failures after power outages.
XFS's journalling mechanism seems (in my experience) to be much closer to the ideal. Other people have experienced losses with XFS, but I'm beginning to believe that those were hardware related (physical defects on the hard drive), which currently, a problem to which currently all filesystems are susceptable.
The link http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf is about serious attempt to evaluate files systems. It is long read, even if you read only conclusions, but it seems fair. You good experience with XFS is a matter of luck or type of work that you do. Having UPS is good for any computer if one wants to prevent data loss, but in case of XFS is even more important as it keeps big chunks of work in memory, and power loss can delete hours of work. File system will be fine, but you would have to rewrite all that wasn't saved and that can be a lot. You bad experience with reiserfs is probably partially due to fsck. That FS is not well suited to hold backup of another reiserfs, because if it has to do fsck, both main FS and backed up can be mixed up in one mess. I don't have handy article about this, but fsck.reiserfs is not what you want to do on regular basis. They tell that explicitely that is dangerous when you run fsck. -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
The link http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf is about serious attempt to evaluate files systems. It is long read, even if you read only conclusions, but it seems fair.
it's really well wrtitten, so well that a=even a non-specialist can understand (most) of the content>. For a thesis, that's not so usual :-) and the author seems to have written code to have an enhanced ext3 file system, do anybody know is ext3 programmers did use this or not? jdd -- http://www.dodin.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 jdd wrote:
Rajko M. wrote:
The link http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf is about serious attempt to evaluate files systems. It is long read, even if you read only conclusions, but it seems fair.
it's really well wrtitten, so well that a=even a non-specialist can understand (most) of the content>. For a thesis, that's not so usual :-)
Hmm... you mean that non-specialists can handle or comprehend Markov Random Fields... :-) which a key to understanding the test model utilised. It is a good paper, and one can only wait until the research is complete... I intend to go over it in a little more depth at a later point ...
and the author seems to have written code to have an enhanced ext3 file system, do anybody know is ext3 programmers did use this or not?
I get the impression that the IRON methodology is more generally applicable, and I would suspect ext with IRON (ixt) is being used as an exemplar to test the impact of the model on an extant OS, ext is the choice out of either preference, simplicity or availability. Would be interesting see the impact on other file systems. This is an interim research report and as such is very interesting and promising, but I do think it is a bit early for the research to be transferred into a production model. It is based on an abstract model, and occasionally abstract models do not fit real world scenarios terribly well.
jdd
- -- ============================================================================== I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. Bjarne Stroustrup ============================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG6ozmasN0sSnLmgIRAo1DAJ96ycsSi8EU/LJYDODaUUBo+mK35wCgkAKo ptl/hULnx9IlJPkI9UzOyo8= =NWVh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
On Friday 14 September 2007 00:12, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
Hans Witvliet wrote:
....
In my experience, reiserfs is not safe. It frequently fails (corruption and/or file loss) in the event of improper shutdown such as power failure or system crash.
Conversely, in Iraq, where I experienced frequent power-related shutdowns, and a couple crashes (due to I think, running out of swap space), I never lost a single file using ext3 and xfs.
I could be mistaken, but i thought the use of xfs inherrently required the use of a no-break power supply, as it holds more data in mem,,,,,
Both are journalled filesystems, but there seems to be an implementation error in Reiserfs 3.x, because I had several fsck failures after power outages.
XFS's journalling mechanism seems (in my experience) to be much closer to the ideal. Other people have experienced losses with XFS, but I'm beginning to believe that those were hardware related (physical defects on the hard drive), which currently, a problem to which currently all filesystems are susceptable.
The link http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf is about serious attempt to evaluate files systems. It is long read, even if you read only conclusions, but it seems fair.
You good experience with XFS is a matter of luck or type of work that you do. Having UPS is good for any computer if one wants to prevent data loss, but in case of XFS is even more important as it keeps big chunks of work in memory, and power loss can delete hours of work. File system will be fine, but you would have to rewrite all that wasn't saved and that can be a lot.
You bad experience with reiserfs is probably partially due to fsck. That FS is not well suited to hold backup of another reiserfs, because if it has to do fsck, both main FS and backed up can be mixed up in one mess. I don't have handy article about this, but fsck.reiserfs is not what you want to do on regular basis. They tell that explicitely that is dangerous when you run fsck.
The only time I ever ran fsck.reiserfs was after crashes (boot up would detect that the fs was "stale" and ran it automatically...leaving unresolved errors, which would dump the system into run-level S and force me to run fsck.reiserfs again manually, until there were no more unresolved errors). Perhaps the default behavior on Reiserfs was wrong? Judging from what you wrote -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Friday 14 September 2007 13:35, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
They tell that explicitely that is dangerous when you run fsck.
The only time I ever ran fsck.reiserfs was after crashes (boot up would detect that the fs was "stale" and ran it automatically...leaving unresolved errors, which would dump the system into run-level S and force me to run fsck.reiserfs again manually, until there were no more unresolved errors).
What year that happened Aaron? I remember once it happened with very early version, and after that I used ext2 for a while. When reiserfs became default I installed it again and ever since I'm happy user. Blackout doesn't mean fsck every time.
Perhaps the default behavior on Reiserfs was wrong?
Could be. As you can read in the article reiserfs is easy to signal panic if hardware is bad. Other file systems are not that easy at halting the system. Taking that running fsck.reiserfs under circumstances is equivalent to mkfs.reiserfs as proponents of ext3 like to underscore, signaling panic to often is not the best strategy, although I can't say that since I installed it again I had sudden kernel panic (computer freeze) ever. -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
On Friday 14 September 2007 13:35, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
They tell that explicitely that is dangerous when you run fsck.
The only time I ever ran fsck.reiserfs was after crashes (boot up would detect that the fs was "stale" and ran it automatically...leaving unresolved errors, which would dump the system into run-level S and force me to run fsck.reiserfs again manually, until there were no more unresolved errors).
What year that happened Aaron?
2003-2005 timeframe.
I remember once it happened with very early version, and after that I used ext2 for a while. When reiserfs became default I installed it again and ever since I'm happy user. Blackout doesn't mean fsck every time.
Perhaps the default behavior on Reiserfs was wrong?
Could be. As you can read in the article reiserfs is easy to signal panic if hardware is
Same disk drives (IBM Deskstore SCSI-2) with ext3 / XFS had no problems.
bad. Other file systems are not that easy at halting the system. Taking that running fsck.reiserfs under circumstances is equivalent to mkfs.reiserfs as proponents of ext3 like to underscore, signaling panic to often is not the best strategy, although I can't say that since I installed it again I had sudden kernel panic (computer freeze) ever.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Saturday 15 September 2007 10:16:49 pm Aaron Kulkis wrote: ...
What year that happened Aaron?
2003-2005 timeframe.
There are many changes in a package changelog since than: 11 in 2006-2007, version 3.6.19-87 and 17 in 2003-2005. versions 3.6.4 to 3.6.19 not all are bug fixes. According to the ChangeLog in the reiserfs source, it seems that only SUSE guys are maintaining reiserfs since version 3.6.19 was out in 2004. ...
As you can read in the article reiserfs is easy to signal panic if hardware is bad. Other file systems are not that easy at halting the system. Taking that running fsck.reiserfs under circumstances is equivalent to mkfs.reiserfs as proponents of ext3 like to underscore, signaling panic to often is not the best strategy, although I can't say that since I installed it again I had sudden kernel panic (computer freeze) ever.
Same disk drives (IBM Deskstore SCSI-2) with ext3 / XFS had no problems.
Again, reading article, linked in previous posts, can help understand why one drive has more problems than the other. The hard disks have complex hardware, driven with complex firmware. Error in firmware makes drive to behave different than specified, which will produce errors that file system has to notice and do something about. File system drivers are not perfect. Sometimes they panic to early, don't try to go around the error, other time they ignore error and continue running. Just from fact that ext2 and xfs have no trouble with certain hard disk drive model doesn't make them right and reiserfs wrong. It can be both ways. The reiserfs is noticing error, but handling is just basic 'stop any operation' instead to mark sectors as bad and find some other place to write data, and ext3/xfs just ignores errors. I would have to reread the article to be able to answer questions: - who does ignore errors more often? - who has better error handling? but the thesis is 153 pages with 131 references and not really easy to read. In any case author Vijayan Prabhakaran, by now probably Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Sciences, made descent effort to analyze files systems and help readers of thesis to get better picture of problems and problem handling. -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
On Saturday 15 September 2007 10:16:49 pm Aaron Kulkis wrote:
...
What year that happened Aaron?
2003-2005 timeframe.
There are many changes in a package changelog since than: 11 in 2006-2007, version 3.6.19-87 and 17 in 2003-2005. versions 3.6.4 to 3.6.19 not all are bug fixes.
According to the ChangeLog in the reiserfs source, it seems that only SUSE guys are maintaining reiserfs since version 3.6.19 was out in 2004.
...
As you can read in the article reiserfs is easy to signal panic if hardware is bad. Other file systems are not that easy at halting the system. Taking that running fsck.reiserfs under circumstances is equivalent to mkfs.reiserfs as proponents of ext3 like to underscore, signaling panic to often is not the best strategy, although I can't say that since I installed it again I had sudden kernel panic (computer freeze) ever.
Same disk drives (IBM Deskstore SCSI-2) with ext3 / XFS had no problems.
Again, reading article, linked in previous posts, can help understand why one drive has more problems than the other.
The hard disks have complex hardware, driven with complex firmware. Error in firmware makes drive to behave different than specified, which will produce errors that file system has to notice and do something about. File system drivers are not perfect. Sometimes they panic to early, don't try to go around the error, other time they ignore error and continue running.
Just from fact that ext2 and xfs have no trouble with certain hard disk drive model doesn't make them right and reiserfs wrong. It can be both ways. The reiserfs is noticing error, but handling is just basic 'stop any operation' instead to mark sectors as bad and find some other place to write data, and ext3/xfs just ignores errors. I would have to reread the article to be able to answer questions: - who does ignore errors more often? - who has better error handling? but the thesis is 153 pages with 131 references and not really easy to read.
Just curious, does anyone know what FS Google themselves use? Do they use one or more of these file systems, or did they take the effort to write their own? Would be interesting to know. JF -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 18 September 2007 06:48, Jim Flanagan wrote: ...
Just curious, does anyone know what FS Google themselves use? Do they use one or more of these file systems, or did they take the effort to write their own? Would be interesting to know.
JF
http://labs.google.com/papers/gfs.html -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2007 06:48, Jim Flanagan wrote: ...
Just curious, does anyone know what FS Google themselves use? Do they use one or more of these file systems, or did they take the effort to write their own? Would be interesting to know.
JF
Most interesting, thanks! JF -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Jim Flanagan wrote:
Rajko M. wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2007 06:48, Jim Flanagan wrote: ...
Just curious, does anyone know what FS Google themselves use? Do they use one or more of these file systems, or did they take the effort to write their own? Would be interesting to know.
JF
Most interesting, thanks!
Here's another recent paper that compares a lot of the Linux filesystems. http://www.linuxworld.com/nllinuxopensourc95749 -- Jonathan Arnold (mailto:jdarnold@buddydog.org) Linux Brain Dump - Linux Notes, HOWTOs and Tutorials: http://www.linuxbraindump.org Daemon Dancing in the Dark, an Open OS weblog: http://freebsd.amazingdev.com/blog/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2007-09-14 at 01:12 -0400, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
XFS's journalling mechanism seems (in my experience) to be much closer to the ideal. Other people have experienced losses with XFS, but I'm beginning to believe that those were hardware related (physical defects on the hard drive),
Not in my case.
which currently, a problem to which currently all filesystems are susceptable.
- -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFG6nJatTMYHG2NR9URAhpMAKCRQFP4I/l49IVAJ7/Tur4BmXI31wCeI4wK h2KsSyV6J6OCbbhkUOSwRB8= =pfSo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
I have two 500 GB SATA II drives. My programs do lots of file I/O and can generate files as large as 15-20 GB in some of my scientific applications.
You could also consider xfs, it's very god for large files. Even better, test your application with both types of filesystem, and then decide.
Testing is definitely the best way to reach a decision. About a year ago, I tested ext3, xfs, and reiserfs for our systems. We do molecular dynamics simulations on clusters, and that means that we have several clients appending to large files (>10GB) simultaneously. I've discovered that xfs came out fastest (and with a relatively low load on the NFS server), ext3 was second, and reiserfs clearly the weakest. However, when I repeated a few of the tests on a local file system, that picture changed drastically: reiserfs was more or less on par with xfs, with ext3 being way behind. So, it definitely depends on the details of your application. As for the stability, the data I have is much "softer" (read: anecdotal). We've had a few crashes with reiserfs, including some data loss. At one point, a rebuild_tree failed and left a disc with no file names and only a limited directory hierarchy. While xfs seems to be more stable, it shows some problems as well (no data loss so far). In my experience, ext3 has been rock solid. However, since fs crashes and data loss are such rare events (at least, they should be), it is quite hard to gather reliable data, and the signal-to-noise ratio tends to be low. Besides, reiserfs takes a long time to mount; and mkfs.xfs is incredibly fast. Of course, creating files systems (and even mounting them) is a rare occurrence, so these points should not influence your decision unless everything else is equal. A. -- Ansgar Esztermann Researcher & Sysadmin http://www.mpibpc.mpg.de/groups/grubmueller/start/people/aeszter/index.shtml
bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
Obviously the openSUSE advice is to go with their default :-)
I have two 500 GB SATA II drives. My programs do lots of file I/O and can generate files as large as 15-20 GB in some of my scientific applications.
As long as you're not also generating thousands of them, ext3 should be just fine. Personally I use only JFS. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Hello Buddy, This is a link with descriptions of Linux file systems by Novell/SuSE it's not recent but still valid. http://www.novell.com/documentation/suse91/suselinux-adminguide/html/apas02.... Regards, Joop Boonen. bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
I have two 500 GB SATA II drives. My programs do lots of file I/O and can generate files as large as 15-20 GB in some of my scientific applications.
Any advice you could give is greatly appreciated.
Buddy Coffey Applied Research Associates Computational and Applied Electromagnetics
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 10 September 2007 09:03, bcoffey@gemacs.com wrote:
I am about to install openSuSE 10.2 on two new computers and see that the 10.2 default file system is ext3 and not Reiser. I'd like some advice as whether to accept the ext3 default or to go with Reiser as I have in the past.
I have two 500 GB SATA II drives. My programs do lots of file I/O and can generate files as large as 15-20 GB in some of my scientific applications.
Any advice you could give is greatly appreciated.
Buddy Coffey Applied Research Associates Computational and Applied Electromagnetics
This is long, but maybe it is worth reading: http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf it shed more light on commodity file systems. -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
This is long, but maybe it is worth reading: http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~vijayan/vijayan-thesis.pdf it shed more light on commodity file systems.
I didn't yet read all, but this seems extremely interesting, thanks jdd -- http://www.dodin.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
participants (28)
-
Aaron Kulkis -
Ansgar Esztermann -
bcoffey＠gemacs.com -
Buddy Coffey
-
Carlos E. R. -
Clayton -
Daniel Bauer -
David C. Rankin -
Fergus Wilde -
Frank Fiene -
G T Smith -
Gabriel -
Hans Witvliet -
jdd -
Jim Flanagan -
Jim Sabatke -
joe -
Joe Morris (NTM) -
Jonathan Arnold -
Jonathan Wilson -
Joop Boonen -
Kai Ponte -
Per Jessen -
Peter Sjoberg -
Rajko M. -
Randall R Schulz -
Sloan
-
Thomas Hertweck