Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:46:37 +0100 | From | "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <> | Subject | Re: reiserFS? |
| |
It is a sad reflection that we have these regular 'fs wars'; and that most of them are driven by peoples bad experiences with particular filesystems.
That leads me to ask what level of testing is performed on each filesystem - are there filesystem torture tests that are getting run by someone (who?) on various filesystems (preferably on large TB sized ones, preferably with simulated failures and resets)? The discussions on Ext4 a few weeks ago made me think that the thing I'd value more than anything else would be a damn good test regime.
It would be much nicer if the fs wars came down to peoples particularly good experiences with filesystems rather than people selecting file systems based on which one has lost them data most rarely.
Dave
P.S. For the record I use Reiser for large (>500GB) fs since I couldn't get Ext3 stable on one a year or so ago and xfs failed the 'recover from hitting reset' test. A couple of years ago I wouldn't touch Reiser because of NFS issues, but it seems to have grown out of that. -- -----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code ------- / Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy \ \ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | MIPS,x86,ARM,SPARC,PPC & HPPA | In Hex / \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/ - 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/
| |