> Basically, it is stable (as of the latest stuff release). However, > I would recommend reiser4 only for personal needs, not for production > (corporate use). The latter requires some work to be done in active Yeah, that was what I was told in the late 90's when I put an early rev of ReiserFS on a production server with a whopping 75GB of storage. Eventually, after about the 5 power loss on the system, it corrupted that partition. Reiserfs-progs was able to recover it, though. So, is this one of those cases where if I put it on a production system it will work great as long as I don't improperly drop power on it? I really like the stability of ReiserFS over everything else I've used. > collaboration with administrators of production systems. Reiser4 has a I own all of these systems. Most are built from scratch. > number of open tickets/bugreports, but all of those problems are hard > reproducible. Every sophisticated file system has a list of such > issues, though. Yeah, hence the question above. > > It is really hard to corrupt a reiser4 partition in a way that fsck > will refuse to fix it. Nevertheless, I wouldn't recommend to use too > large partitions. The smaller partition, the larger chances, that I'll > take a look at it, if any problems with fsck. I have a back-up copy (actually several back-up copies). And, this is data that doesn't change that much, so I can recover fairly easily. > Also, keep in mind that > intelligent compression (default mode) is not optimal for large media- > files (see https://reiser4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Reiser4_Howto for > details). With a 15TB drive, I'm not worried about compression. That, IMO, would be a performance hit anyway. > > Reiser4 is better in all items (performance, features, implementation, > maintainability, etc) than its predecessor ReiserFS(v3). > > Thanks, > Edward. Thanks Edward! I'll give ReiserFS4 a shot! Andy > > On 10/04/2017 12:29 AM, ANDY KENNEDY wrote: > > All, > > > > I've searched around on the web a bit and found various folks spouting > > off about Reiser4 here and there. I am about to reinstall a system and > > want to choose the right filesystem. I read some report about ReiserFS > > v3 not being multi-thread safe and that ext4 ran circles around it. I > > was disappointed at the hanging I was getting on ext4, so switched back > > to ReiserFS and got more consistent high performance. I have a power- > > house system built with a large HW Raid 5 drive and want to reformat > > and repartition that sucker up. In your opinion, what is the best > > filesystem to use right now? Keeping in mind that I do low-level > > driver work for my company and am used to hacking around in the kernel, > > so patching a kernel doesn't frighten me at all. > > > > It looks like Reiser4 still isn't in the mainline kernel... which is > > disappointing to me that we developers also allow political > > bureaucracy to shadow over potentially better solutions. So, what is > > the sate of Reiser4 and should I go with that for my 16-core system, > > stick with Reiser3, or grab hold to ext4? > > > > Thanks for your opinion in advance! > > > > Andy > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
