[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by regarding reiser4 inclusion
    Alan, I have seen only anecdotal evidence against reiserfsck, and I have
    seen formal tests from Vitaly (which it seems a user has replicated)
    where our fsck did better than ext3s. Note that these tests are of the
    latest fsck from us: I am sure everyone understands that it takes time
    for an fsck to mature, and that our early fsck's were poor. I will also
    say the V4's fsck is more robust than V3's because we made disk format
    changes specifically to help fsck.

    Now I am not dismissing your anecdotes as I will never dismiss data I
    have not seen, and it sounds like you have seen more data than most
    people, but I must dismiss your explanation of them.

    Being able to throw away all of the tree but the leaves and twigs with
    extent pointers and rebuild all of it makes V4 very robust, more so than
    ext3. This business of inodes not moving, I don't see what the
    advantage is, we can lose the directory entry and rebuild just as well
    as ext3, probably better because we can at least figure out what
    directory it was in.

    Vitaly can say all of this more expertly than I....

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-01 20:39    [W:0.026 / U:0.432 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site