![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Denis Vlasenko wrote: > And second, reiser team was a bit lax at fixing bugs. > Not too bad when compared to other FSes, but still. If we feel a bug should be fixed without waiting for a major release (98%+ of bugs), we try to fix it in 3 days, and usually succeed at that. Not all users agree with us that a given bug should wait for a major release. > Frankly, on the first problem I think that you are right, Hans, > and putting plugins into VFS _now_ makes little sense because > we can't know whether anybody will ever want to have plugins > for some other FS, so requiring reiser people to do all the shuffling > _now_ > for questionable gain is simply not fair. It can be done later if needed. > > It leaves you with the other option: remove the second problem. > Try to fix bugs. Including reiser3 ones. > I'm not saying that you are not doing this at all, > but I distinctly remember that some discussions (about locking > problems IIRC) were "brushed aside" by reiser people instead of plainly > admitting that problem exists and they will work on fixing it. > > * What is that story about hash chain size limit? > Is it present on reiser4 also? Will it be addressed? Now that we (Nikita actually) solved it in Reiser4 by handling duplicate keys I now realize that I could have solved it in V3 years ago if I had been brighter, but since V4 is ready I think it is better to not destabilize code in V3 by changing things now. It might touch a lot of lines of code to fix in V3, Nikita would know better than I. > > For the problems I personally seen: > > * I had 3 reiser3 partitions on a 32Mb RAM box, and massive inode > updates (chown -R) ate all RAM and deadlocked the box. This is VFS/VM not us. You are right that it should be fixed, as it is indicative of deep problems with the memory management code that require fundamental changes. > You adviced me to reduce journal size. It works, > but shouldn't reiser do it dynamically on mount if needed? Yes, it would be nice, could you email chris@suse.com about it? This is a feature that is ok to add to a stable branch, I cannot logically define why but I feel it is so.... after much testing and a beta though.... Note that V4 fixes this by using wandering logs..... > Are there any other known oom deadlocks? That are specific to reiserfs rather than all of Linux, I think not..... > * Does reiser still requires 100.00% defect-free media? Not if you use device mapper. > * Are there plans for making reiserfsck interface compatible with fsck? > I mean, making it so that reiserfsck can be symlinked to fsck.reiser > and it will work? Currently, there seems to be some incompatibility > in command-line switches. (I will dig out details and send separately > when I'll get back to my Linux box.) Not sure what you mean. Forgive me, I have not supervised fsck as closely as other things. > > P.S. I am a reiser3 user on all my boxes. > Thanks Hans for your work. > -- > vda > > Thank you for your suggestions and advice, Hans - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-08-01 11:33 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||