On Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:42:31 +0200, "Ralf Hildebrandt" <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> said: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 11:39:01AM +0000, JP Howard wrote: > > 'all-in-one' patch to bring Ext3 up to that in .20, but haven't seen much > > performance impact compared to .19. > > > > We're also testing ResiserFS (with Chris Mason's data logging patches) on > > one of our servers. Our stress testing suggests that it performs well, > > but we'll have to see how it performs in a real world situation... > > My experiences with ReiserFS are: If you're willing to tolerate total > data loss, it's ok. > > Also, ReiserFS uses "data=writeback" (in ext3-speak), so it's faster > than "data=ordered". > Chris Mason's patches add a data=journal mode, which is what we've been testing with. I'm aware of problems with ReiserFS+NFS (now fixed), and problems that occured when the new VM went in (now fixed). I'm also aware of potential problems with inconsistent data when not using data=journal mode with the data logging patch. I'm not aware of any outstanding problems with ReiserFS that can cause corruption. But I'm no expert--are there some outstanding issues that you're aware of? I wrote a stress test tool over the weekend that simulates 500 users simultaneously using IMAP and LMTP doing a wide variety of actions. I ran it on our test server with ReiserFS for 24 hours and all was fine. But of course testing never really tells you that much about Real Life... _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
