LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-04-2002, 04:13 AM   #1
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Rep: Reputation: 30
What is ReiserFS? How is it differnet from Ext3?


Dear ALl,
I have just installed SuSE 7.3, and by default it formatted the linux partitions as ReiserFS. What exactly Is ReiserFS? What advantages/disadvantages does it have over say Ext2 or Ext3?
Just curious.

Thanx for taking the time, effort, and patience to read through and/or reply to this
 
Old 06-04-2002, 04:24 AM   #2
IceNineJon
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca, USA
Distribution: Mandrake 9.1
Posts: 82

Rep: Reputation: 15
From what little knowledge I have about it, reiserfs was created to increase speed and efficiency for large files (kind of like how NTFS is optimized for larger files than FAT(32) is). All three are journaling file systems. Can't tell you much else about it...I'm using ext2
 
Old 06-04-2002, 04:52 AM   #3
MartBrooks
Member
 
Registered: May 2002
Location: London
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 388

Rep: Reputation: 31
Both reiser and ext3 are indeed journalling file systems.

Reiser also has some other features which can make the storage of files more efficient by allowing the "tails" of multiple files to be stored on the same inode.

I personally use ext3 as I've had some fairly major problems with reiser in the past.

Regards
 
Old 06-04-2002, 05:01 AM   #4
llama_meme
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: London, England
Distribution: Gentoo, FreeBSD
Posts: 590

Rep: Reputation: 30
I heard that ReiserFS was optimised for handling small files (although I believe it handles large files as fast as ext2/3). The idea being that databases can be stored as many small files instead of one large one or something...

Alex
 
Old 06-04-2002, 12:23 PM   #5
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
hmmm, interesting. Thanx for the added knowledge. I learn something new every day. If any of you jhappen to stumble on a link of some kind that fully explains Journaling file systems and/or ReiserFS please feel free to share with all of us.

Thanx for all the replies. They are indeed much appreciated
 
Old 06-04-2002, 12:36 PM   #6
Mara
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Location: Grenoble
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 9,696

Rep: Reputation: 232Reputation: 232Reputation: 232
I'm using Reiser. From my point of view, it's slower than ext2, but not much,really. In my case, ~5%. Since I instlled it, no problems with wrong shutdowns etc.
 
Old 06-04-2002, 12:49 PM   #7
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Yes I have noticed that I barely (if ever) have to run fsck or have to wait while SuSE runs fsck at boot time due to Ext3 not shutting down properly. On the other hand, I think ReiserFS is slightly faster than Ext3 (dunno about Ext2).
I need to learn more about this ReiserFS business, LOL
 
Old 06-04-2002, 12:49 PM   #8
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Sorry guys, I clicked on "reply" by mistake and i thought I was in another topic. Sorry again

Last edited by shassouneh; 06-04-2002 at 12:51 PM.
 
Old 06-04-2002, 01:49 PM   #9
DavidPhillips
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: South Alabama
Distribution: Fedora / RedHat / SuSE
Posts: 7,163

Rep: Reputation: 58
I tested it a while back and on a slow computer it was slower than ext3 and I did not see much difference on ext2 vs ext3. However this may change on a fast computer. I just decided to stick with ext3.
 
Old 06-04-2002, 02:48 PM   #10
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
I C. I'm not running a fast compuet. Just a P3 500 for now since my other machines died on me
 
Old 06-04-2002, 03:54 PM   #11
Stephanie_new
Member
 
Registered: May 2002
Location: Hell, A.K.A. Arizona
Distribution: MD 8x / WIN2K / QNX
Posts: 156

Rep: Reputation: 30
From my understanding, ext3 is basically the same as ext2, but with journalling capabilites. This would seem to be the case for me as BeOS, which can read ext2 partitions, has no problem with ext 3 reading either.

ReiserFS is a different file system altogether. It is a project that is taking advantage of new developments in computing technology, instead of building on top of existing technology.
 
Old 06-04-2002, 04:25 PM   #12
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Cool. Thanx for the info Stephanie. Does anyone know where I can obtain specific information about the advantages/disadvantages of ReiserFS?
 
Old 06-04-2002, 04:31 PM   #13
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Doing A simple search on Google, I found a page and I thought I'd share it with you guys

ReiserFS project

Apparently ReiserFS has one advantage (according to this site) over Ext2 or Ext3, that is you are not required to run fsck all the time. Also, according to this site, it saves up to 6% of disk space. Who knows whether or not this information is true, but this ReiserFS thing seems to have lots of potential
 
Old 06-04-2002, 04:38 PM   #14
MartBrooks
Member
 
Registered: May 2002
Location: London
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 388

Rep: Reputation: 31
Errm, that's 50% incorrect. Using ext3 will somwehat negate the need for a full fsck in the event of an unclean mount.

Resiser /does/ save diskspace due to clustered file tails as I mentioned earlier.

What that page fails to mention, and I still believe to be a problem, is that if, for example, you stick 1.8 million 4-30k jpegs on a reiser partition, you shoukd make sure you have a really really good backup as resier will turn it into data puree.

Regards

Last edited by MartBrooks; 06-04-2002 at 04:39 PM.
 
Old 06-04-2002, 05:03 PM   #15
shassouneh
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cheney, WA
Distribution: SuSE Linux Professional 9.2
Posts: 556

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
What do you mean by "data puree"? This is troublesome and I'd like to know about it
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ext3 to reiserfs spaceballs Slackware 6 07-25-2005 05:56 PM
ext3 --> reiserFS ? Optimistic Debian 2 11-21-2004 06:35 PM
reiserfs -> ext3 pk21 Linux - Newbie 6 09-10-2003 03:26 PM
reiserfs vs. ext3 Mux Linux - General 9 12-11-2002 11:17 AM
ReiserFS(ext3) da Perp Linux - Newbie 3 03-09-2002 03:47 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration