Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:28:31 +0200 | From | Christian Trefzer <> | Subject | Re: reiserFS? |
| |
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 06:16:31PM +0200, Xavier Roche wrote: > > It simply the best filesystem for many kinds of usage patterns. > > The most frightening too. Reiserfs might be suitable for very specific > appliactions, but to use it in production machine, you need to have > some guts. > > My last reiserfs partition was blown up two days ago, because of a bad > sector, plus a fatal oops, looping endlessly. This was the second > time, and the last one, as none of my ext3 filesystems *ever* had > similar problems, despite numerous other bad sector issues. Not > mentionning the funny "recovery" tool, which generally finishes to > trash your data.
I don't quite understand. You are supposed to dd_rescue the whole block device to a working drive and use fsck on the copy. Whatever is lost in the process must of course be restored from a recent backup. But, as a friend of mine put it recently, people don't need backup, they only need restore ; )
fsck on a faulty drive might cause even more damage - how do you know that other areas of the device are OK?
I also oppose the ReiserFS-v3.x design philosophy regarding faulty storage layer, but in any case where your _live_ data is valuable and uptime counts, you _really_should_ use a RAID of some sort.
Kind regards, uziel
PS: Your mail was line-wrapped really bad, you might want to look into that. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |