LinuxQuestions.org
Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-03-2005, 02:24 PM   #1
perfect_circle
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Athens, Greece
Distribution: Slackware, arch
Posts: 1,783

Rep: Reputation: 52
reiser fs vs ext3


Is reiserfs more efficient that ext3?
I'm planning to reinstall slack and i don't know what fs i should use.
The last time i used reiserfs.
My problem is that partition magic does not support reiser fs and i will have problems if i want to resize it. Also the tool to read this from windows is not gui.
I prefer explore2fs. When i'm in linux i use the console a lot more that the window managers, but in windows i can't get used to use cmd. It sucks anyway...
 
Old 02-03-2005, 02:26 PM   #2
secesh
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Savannah, GA
Distribution: Ubuntu, Gentoo, Mythbuntu, ClarkConnect
Posts: 1,154

Rep: Reputation: 47
this might help you decide:
http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/212/
 
Old 02-03-2005, 03:13 PM   #3
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
I wanna try reiser4.. but.. considering that it's not quite stable yet and will require a patch and recompile.. not to mention doing a backup and migrating my entire filesystem.. urgh..
 
Old 02-03-2005, 03:18 PM   #4
gargamel
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Distribution: Slackware, SLAX, OpenSuSE
Posts: 1,593

Rep: Reputation: 142Reputation: 142
It depends on what you are going to do.

My own experience: Ext3 fails badly on large partitions (>25 GB) when you frequently try to copy large files (>100 MB or so) to and from it. On smaller partitions or with smaller files it hasn't caused problems on my machines.


Eg, if you have a backup partition where you put large tar archives, XFS would be an excellent file system choice. Fast, reliable, and it doesn't slow down your machine during file transfers.

ReiserFS 3 and before is not a true journaling file system, but it has never let me down.

The overall winner, however, in a comparison benchmark done by Linux New Media (publishers of Linux Magazin, Linux User and more) was JFS. It was top 3 in every benchmark. However, it's not part of the Slackware default kernel as far as I know....

gargamel
 
Old 02-03-2005, 03:25 PM   #5
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
I never considered jfs... sorry for stealing the thread perfect_circle...
but does anyone have any real experience or benchmarks for reiser4?
I'm seriously considering using it.. I'd like to at least hear from someone who has tried it..
 
Old 02-03-2005, 04:46 PM   #6
perfect_circle
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Athens, Greece
Distribution: Slackware, arch
Posts: 1,783

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 52
Thank you all for your replies. I guess i'll stay with reiserFs. I never had any problem with it at all...
 
Old 02-03-2005, 07:10 PM   #7
win32sux
Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 9,870

Rep: Reputation: 371Reputation: 371Reputation: 371Reputation: 371
Quote:
Originally posted by DaWallace
does anyone have any real experience or benchmarks for reiser4?
here's some benchmarks:

http://www.namesys.com/benchmarks.html

http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html

Quote:
Originally posted by gargamel
ReiserFS 3 and before is not a true journaling file system
i have slackware 10.x and i'm using reiserfs 3 which is what has been used in slackware for a long time and believe me, it's journaling ;-) perhaps you could explain why you say it isn't a "true journaling file system"?? AFAIK, the one that isn't "really" journaling is ext3, as it's basically just ext2 with a journaling layer added on top of it (good for backwards compatibility with ext2)...

i'd assume slackware 11.x will come with reiser4 (perhaps not as default, but at least as an option) if reiser4 is stable enough by that time...

i'd also like to say that i think there's a reason why reiserfs is currently the default filesystem on slackware: it's cuz it blows most of the other filesystems clear out of the water!!

reiserfs vs. ext3: no-contest, IMHO... Hans Reiser rules!!

=)

Last edited by win32sux; 02-03-2005 at 07:47 PM.
 
Old 02-03-2005, 08:54 PM   #8
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
...

Last edited by DaWallace; 02-03-2005 at 09:29 PM.
 
Old 02-03-2005, 08:56 PM   #9
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
reiser3 isn't a real journalling fs because it doesn't have a "real" journal.. but it compensates quite well
ext3 really is a journalling fs.. even if it was stacked onto ext2

[using reiser4] WHOO!!
also I'm not gonna trust first-party benchmarks.. ever... but luckily you provided others.. either way.. I have switched and I must say that my bootup was quite a bit faster and I'm very impressed overall.. it also appears to use space much more effeciently than ext3 and reiser3
 
Old 02-03-2005, 11:25 PM   #10
win32sux
Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 9,870

Rep: Reputation: 371Reputation: 371Reputation: 371Reputation: 371
Quote:
Originally posted by DaWallace
reiser3 isn't a real journalling fs because it doesn't have a "real" journal.. but it compensates quite well
ext3 really is a journalling fs.. even if it was stacked onto ext2
okay, i'm intrigued... what makes a "real" journal?? and how is the ext3 journal more "real" than reiser's?? and how does reiser "compensate"??

AFAIK, a journaling filesystem is one which keeps track of pending changes/transactions so that if there is an interruption (such as a crash, power outage, etc.) the changes/transactions will be completed as soon as the journal is replayed... so it would seem to me that you either have a journal or you don't... i would really appreciate it if you could elaborate somewhat... i'm really curious about this...

as for the benchmarks i posted, all i did was a simple google... try it and you'll see there's lots of third-party reiserfs benchmarks all over the web...
 
Old 02-04-2005, 06:33 AM   #11
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally posted by win32sux
AFAIK, a journaling filesystem is one which keeps track of pending changes/transactions so that if there is an interruption (such as a crash, power outage, etc.)

in that sense.. it is.. it has many mechanisms that have a similar effect as a journal and uses them in the same way as a journal.. while ext3 has a real journal in the conventional sense..

amusingly enough, the information you're looking for is in the article linked to in the second post..

Reiser4 has full journal support
 
Old 02-04-2005, 11:27 AM   #12
dennisk
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Southwestern USA
Distribution: CentOS
Posts: 279

Rep: Reputation: 30
I know that LBT has some real issues with Reiser4 so I doubt it will appear in the kernel anytime soon. Basically, Linus feels that Resier and Co. haven't really thought out the consequences of the changes made in Reiser4 . Google on Linus and Reiser4 and watch the sparks fly! <g>

Dennisk
 
Old 02-04-2005, 02:23 PM   #13
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
... I for one don't have a problem with patching..
 
Old 02-04-2005, 03:19 PM   #14
cythrawll
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: IL, USA
Distribution: Slackware 10
Posts: 167

Rep: Reputation: 31
I found reiser is alot more stable than ext3, I have a problem with alot of power outages and stuff in this small town (I should invest in an UPC) and I like to play around and experiment with linux quite a bit (and often hardlock my system) anyhow, ext3 doesn't recover well if a file system isn't unmounted cleanly. reiserfs always recovers nicely. (as per my experience)

Last edited by cythrawll; 02-04-2005 at 03:22 PM.
 
Old 02-04-2005, 03:54 PM   #15
DaWallace
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Southern Maine, United States
Distribution: Slackware Ubuntu Debian FreeBSD
Posts: 418

Rep: Reputation: 31
I've had quite a few problems with reiserfs. nothing serious. but EVERY time I get around to running reiserfsck it detects something that requires me to use rebuild-tree. it's never killed my data though.. so.. it's still really good
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ext2, ext3 or reiser FS dna9 Linux - Newbie 9 12-21-2004 03:05 AM
Filesystems: Reiser vs. Ext3 CanadianPenguin Linux - Hardware 2 01-27-2004 10:46 AM
reiser is way faster than ext3 illtbagu Linux - Hardware 17 12-20-2003 02:42 PM
reiser vs. ext3 chrismiceli Linux - General 4 07-09-2003 04:11 PM
What are differences between ext2, ext3, and reiser? snocked Linux - Newbie 10 01-11-2003 04:50 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 AM.

Main Menu
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
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration