Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:15:49 -0600 | From | "Jeffrey V. Merkey" <> | Subject | Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion |
| |
Nate Diller wrote:
> On 7/31/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote: > >> Nate Diller wrote: >> >> > On 7/31/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 7/31/06, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Its well accepted that reiserfs3 has some robustness problems >> in the >> >> >> face of physical media errors. The structure of the file system >> >> and the >> >> >> tree basis make it very hard to avoid such problems. XFS appears >> >> to have >> >> >> managed to achieve both robustness and better data structures. >> >> >> >> >> >> How reiser4 compares I've no idea. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Citation? >> >> > >> >> > I ask because your clam differs from the only detailed research >> that >> >> > I'm aware of on the subject[1]. In figure 2 of the iron filesystems >> >> > paper that Ext3 is show to ignore a great number of data-loss >> inducing >> >> > failure conditions that Reiser3 detects an panics under. >> >> > >> >> > Are you sure that you aren't commenting on cases where Reiser3 >> alerts >> >> > the user to a critical data condition (via a panic) which leads >> to a >> >> > trouble report while ext3 ignores the problem which suppresses the >> >> > trouble report from the user? >> >> > >> >> > *1) http://www.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Publications/iron-sosp05.pdf >> >> >> >> Hi Gregory, Wikimedia Foundation and LKML? >> >> >> >> How's Wikimania going. :-) >> >> >> >> What he says is correct. I have seen some serious issues with >> reiserfs >> >> in terms of stability and >> >> data corruption. Resier is however FASTER, but the statement is has >> >> robustness issues is accurate. >> >> I was using reiserfs but we opted to make EXT3 the default for Solera >> >> appliances, even when using Suse 10 >> >> due to issues I have seen with data corruption and hard hangs on >> RAID 0 >> >> read/write sector errors. I have >> >> stopped using it for local drives and based everything on EXT3. >> Not to >> >> say it won't get there eventually, but >> >> file systems have to endure a lot of time in the field and deployment >> >> befor they are ready for prime time. >> >> >> >> The Wikimedia appliances use Wolf Mountain, and I've tested it for >> about >> >> 4 months with few problems, but >> >> I only use it for hosting the Cherokee Langauge Wikipedia. It's >> >> performance is several magnitudes better >> >> than either EXT3 or ReiserFS. Despite this, for vertical wiki >> servers, >> >> its ok to go out with, folks can specifiy >> >> whether they want appliances with EXT3, Reiser, or WMFS, but iit's a >> >> long way from being "cooked" >> >> completely, though it does scale to 1 exabyte FS images. >> > >> > >> > i've seen you mention the Wolf Mountain FS in other emails, but google >> > isn't telling me a lot about it. Do you have a whitepaper? are there >> > any published benchmark results? what sort of workloads do you >> > benchmark? >> > >> > NATE >> > >> Wikipedia is the app for now. I have not done any benchmarks on the FS >> side, just the capture side, and its been transferred to >> another entity. I have no idea what they are naming it to, but I expect >> you may hear about it soon. One of the incarnations >> of it is Solera's DSFS which can be reviewed here: >> >> www.soleranetworks.com > > > so this is a single stream, write only? ... > >> I can sustain 850 MB/S throughput from user space with it -- about 5 x >> any other FS. On some hardware, I've broken >> the 1.25 GB/S (gigabyte/second) windows with it. > > > and you're saying it scales to much higher multi-spindle > single-machine throughput. cool. > > i'd love to see a whitepaper, or failing that, have an off-list > discussion of your approach and the various kernel limitations you ran > up against in testing. i don't suppose they invited you to the Kernel > Summit to talk about it, heh. > > NATE > The patents have been filed for over a year, and will publish in several weeks at uspto.gov -- that's the only acclaim I care for -- one that results in value for the industry and more patent protection for Linux and profits for folks. No, I have not been invited to the summit, probably because of the lawsuit I filed against some folks who were threatening my family -- Peter Anvin booted me off Kernel.org after allowing folks to pinch my code and copy my bash history files all over the internet, and several folks have stiffed me. I could care less. I keep creating cool technology, make tons of money off of it, and I have cultivated an excellent relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation, and I am now the principal contributor on the Cherokee Wikipedia. Wales even deleted the article folks had used to smear me and made folks rewrite it. Wales is a very nice man and good dude.
I am content to contribute to Linux from a business viewpoint, and if the treatment I received from Anvin is par for kernel.org accounts, I don't care for one -- IP addresses are rather cheap on the internet. I was and have remained loyal to Linux through it all.
I am appreciative of your interest. Check uspto.gov in next few weeks for published applications, it's all described there, distributed architecture and all.
All my Wikilove.
Jeff
- 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/
| |