LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Desktop
User Name
Password
Linux - Desktop This forum is for the discussion of all Linux Software used in a desktop context.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-14-2007, 11:15 AM   #16
Emerson
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
Distribution: Gentoo ~arch
Posts: 6,316

Rep: Reputation: Disabled

Well, it's junk for me.

Here's the story:
Once upon time I used to work for a government business. I had a mail server running Debian. One nice day we had several power breaks in short intervals, somehow UPS couldn't manage it, the mail server stopped responding. When I arrived it still was running but the file system was fubar. All reiserfs tools gave nothing but strange errors. I was totally stumped. The Bad Thing (TM) was our business was under audit investigation, there were some very damn important forms emailed to my Big Boss. He never got these and missed the deadline. I'll stop here, do not like to recall bad memories.
 
Old 06-14-2007, 11:39 AM   #17
nx5000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Out
Posts: 3,307

Rep: Reputation: 57
I can't explain it (take it as is) but I also experienced lost files with reiserfs. Same for xfs. Don't ask me why! I have no time to investigate and nothing against these FS. Actually ext3 wouldn't have evoluated like this without reiserfs.
This month I'm developping a kernel driver and the kernel locks 40 times or so. I have not experienced one single lost file with ext3.

And I think all the concepts introduced by reiserfs have now been introduced in ext3 and that's probably why Suse went to ext3. There's recent info about this on the web but can't find it..

There's another benchmark here:
https://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388
(long reading)
When I read the initial post, it was not representative. I didn't read it since then.

Last edited by nx5000; 06-14-2007 at 11:41 AM.
 
Old 06-14-2007, 01:19 PM   #18
Gethyn
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Distribution: (X)Ubuntu 10.04/10.10, Debian 5, CentOS 5
Posts: 900

Rep: Reputation: 32
When I first set up my server, I used reiser as that was the Slackware default. After a couple of filesystem corruptions and reinstalls I decided to stick to ext3, which has never caused me any problems. As others have pointed out, my saying this doesn't prove anything, but personally I wouldn't use reiser on a new install again. That said, my work computer uses reiser for its root partition and I've never had any problems with that. The work computer is newer and better looked after than the server (which was made out of old spare parts), so maybe reiser is less good for recovering from the problems potentially caused by slightly flaky hardware.
 
Old 06-14-2007, 02:44 PM   #19
dawkcid
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: UK
Distribution: LFS,Slackware,Slamd64,NetBSD
Posts: 102

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx5000
And I think all the concepts introduced by reiserfs have now been introduced in ext3 and that's probably why Suse went to ext3. There's recent info about this on the web but can't find it..
SUSE's/Novell's rationale for switching to ext3:

http://linux.wordpress.com/2006/09/2...-it-default-fs

http://www.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/10/12/2120204
 
Old 06-14-2007, 04:22 PM   #20
Electro
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I use a combination of EXT3 and XFS for my Linux installs. EXT3 for /boot and /var/log. Then XFS for everything else. ReiserFS is unreliable and it has horrible tools to fix itself. XFS is superior to EXT3 and ReiserFS because it has fast mounts, fixes, and handles small and large files wel. However, XFS needs a computer with at least 512 MB of RAM to do well.

Thanks to XFS, it did a great job with sector corruption and partiton table corruption. About 99% of files were retrieved with out any noticable problems. The other 1% of the files were useless.
 
Old 06-14-2007, 04:32 PM   #21
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emerson
Now, how much is such a statement worth? Every now and then you can see some noob telling others: "Wow, I reinstalled Linux, man my computer is fast with Reiser!".

snip

The answer is: In case of power outage the risk of corruption is by far greatest with ReiserFS. ReiserFS is the only Linux filesystem that significantly suffers from fragmentation.

snip

Compared to EXT3, JFS and XFS Reiser is nothing but a junk filesystem today - regardless whether the author is convicted or not.
It`s common knowledge that XFS has severe problems with power failures.
 
Old 06-14-2007, 04:49 PM   #22
nx5000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Out
Posts: 3,307

Rep: Reputation: 57
For XFS, yes that's by design. Using XFS without a UPS is suicidal! Anyway for me this FS was too complex to tweak and it was not adapted for my desktop machine. And I do have 512Mb but it's the CPU that goes crazy (I also think this is by design). Probably the cpu is better used but it added to much latency for me.
After making my own benchmark (using iozone) for several use cases, I have found that they (xfs,ntfs,reiser3,ext3) are similiar on the mean. I wanted to speed up my debian package database (lots of little files). No way. I was surprised that the original ntfs kernel driver was the quickest on some read access (but amazing horrible on others..) I didn't try JFS yet.
If you have specific need, like for servers with big databases, then you will get good improvement by trying/tweaking other fs.
For desktop use with complete different tasks.. I think it doesn't matter.
Poor windows with its only 2 Filesystems.. booh
 
Old 06-14-2007, 07:31 PM   #23
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
There are some recent benchmarks here:

http://linuxhelp.150m.com/resources/fs-benchmarks.htm

Plus: Exciting conspiracy theories!!!! Why is Hans Reiser in jail solved et al!!!

Oh well - maybe the benchmarks are not that trustworthy :-)
 
Old 06-15-2007, 12:38 AM   #24
Electro
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
It`s common knowledge that XFS has severe problems with power failures.
That is load of bull. I have been using XFS for several years now. It works well even if the power abruptly went out.

The format options that I used for XFS are the following.

block = 512 bytes or 1024 bytes
agcount = 32
extsize = 8192 bytes or 16384 bytes
 
Old 06-15-2007, 02:53 AM   #25
nx5000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Out
Posts: 3,307

Rep: Reputation: 57
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS
 
Old 06-15-2007, 04:10 AM   #26
Electro
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Still I never experience data corruption when using XFS.
 
Old 06-15-2007, 06:19 AM   #27
nx5000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Out
Posts: 3,307

Rep: Reputation: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electro
Still I never experience data corruption when using XFS.
Yes I understand. I see that you are using 2.6.16 of the kernel.
My experience:When I was trying XFS, I was using a testing distro (bleeding edge) for development.
And, in kernel 2.6.17 (which I installed the same day as the release), an important regression appeared in XFS. At this time, the default tools to repair xfs did not do their job on my system. I was left with an unusuable disk until the bug was corrected/documented
This was too much for me: The above reasons in my other posts + this bug convinced me that XFS is not for my desktop PC and the use I make about it. Also my benchmarks were probably wrong because I noticed not a single performance increase but the opposite (due to intensive cpu usage and the process using the files not using the cpu enough)
I would like to try it again for my /var (some dir contains +1000 files) but I am just too scared that I loose again some files during kernel lockup/powerfail.

Last edited by nx5000; 06-15-2007 at 06:20 AM.
 
Old 06-16-2007, 11:30 AM   #28
admmoon
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: A ghastly place called Louisiana.
Distribution: Opensuse 10.2 (work and home); PCLinuxOS, (at work); Ubuntu CE & Ichthux (Church)
Posts: 7

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx5000
Be careful using anything or any advice from wikipedia. Anyone can change an entry and there are many entries that are blatantly wrong. Furthermore, when someone tries to change the wrong information you frequently find there are little territorial nerds who change it back to the wrong information (I assume to protect "their" forum for their opinion, even if it is based on bad or outdated information).

Sorry, as a professor, I just get riled whenever wikipedia is mentioned.

Back to reiserfs causing problems. I have just had 2 computers at work have the same file corruption that caused me to post this thread. I have had to re-install linux on both because the tools to fix reiser kept saying the file system was fixed, but the problem persisted when I tried to reboot. I have now moved both work computers to ext3

Last edited by admmoon; 06-16-2007 at 11:33 AM.
 
Old 06-16-2007, 12:00 PM   #29
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
So what? I had data corruption with ext2,jfs,xfs and reiser4 - not completely unexpected.
Never had a problem with reiser3 but that could also hit any time.

There are people experiencing data corruption with every file system out there.It's not just the file system.It also depends on the hardware.On one box I just couldn't run ext2/3.Did get corrupted even w/o power failures or anything at all.

On another jfs just crashes and burns.

Stuff is going to happen no matter what you use.If x doesn't work on your machine use y.
Would be nice to know before it happens but unfortunately nobody can guarantee that to you.

Getting reliable info from wikipedia is pretty much the same as military intelligence.

Last edited by crashmeister; 06-16-2007 at 12:02 PM.
 
Old 06-16-2007, 12:12 PM   #30
Emerson
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
Distribution: Gentoo ~arch
Posts: 6,316

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
There are people experiencing data corruption with every file system out there.
Hmmm ... Are you saying it's like a lottery? Are you saying people have equal chance of filesystem corruption regardless what filesystem is used?
 
  


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
Logrotate causing all sorts of problems: trscookie Linux - Software 1 05-03-2007 10:54 AM
network interface name causing problems android6011 Linux - Networking 2 09-16-2006 10:41 PM
X Causing Problems (as usual) gsibble Linux - General 2 03-18-2004 08:29 AM
9.2 installation causing network problems centerice Linux - Networking 1 02-05-2004 07:21 AM
Help! New GeForce 4 causing problems Shaka999 Linux - Hardware 2 03-18-2003 01:00 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Desktop

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 AM.

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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration