On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Carlos E. R.
I think reiserfs is more resilient in this situation. At lest, it checks faster. I can't compare them, but it seems to me that no filesystem can guarantee clearing the appropriate "dirty" bit when power is lost at precisely the wrong nanosecond. I'm no expert though. Absolutely, there is no guarantee. And when reiserfs really fails, it fails royally.
The only time I ever had reiser fail was when I got a bad sector in the beginning of a partition that screwed up the directory tables. I was able to use dd_rescue and repair it tho to save the data.
However, I understand it was a design goal, to survive power-cuts, and seems to work quite well in this respect, with some quirks. Sometimes the self check thinks everything is ok and it is not: then you need an fsck made from the rescue dvd.
I switched to reiser back when SuSE did in like 7.3 or so. I got tired of ext2's inability to recover from a bad poweroff. I've used reiser exclusively since, and will continue to do so. It recovers fast and it's performance is fast. Shame that people crap on it because the designer is a murderer. It's still one of the best file systems, and it is still being maintained and extended without him. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org