[Cialug] Corruption with ReiserFS

[Stuart Thiessen]

That may be.  My experience with this particular server is that it was 
only functioning as a fileserver for my office and shared with remote 
offices using sftp and something happened (I'm not sure what yet) and 
the FS said it was corrupted. I followed its instructions (which were 
quite cryptic to me) and it appeared to recover the files but the 
contents were unreadable.  That was quite frustrating to me as this was 
supposed to be a journaled filesystem and it should have read it back 
correctly.  I never had that problem with any FS I have ever worked 
with.

It may be faster, but I'm more concerned with reliability. I've been 
doing some checking on the web and it seems that ReiserFS has had more 
incidents with corruption than other FS, so I will probably reinstall 
with ext3 for now until I have a better idea of what is more stable.

Stuart

On Aug 28, 2005, at 0:17, <dave at visionary.com> wrote:

>
> I've had really good luck with reiserfs.
>
> I think it's only fair to note that James is talking about a fairly
> extreme case, where he's (IIRC) ripping video from a DV camera which
> creates huge files. For the average user reiserfs is going to give you
> better performance than ext3.
>
> ext3 does have the benefit of being able to mount as plain old ext2 if 
> the
> journal gets totally corrupted. In cases where I've had problems with
> reiser, it was able to recover on its own. The only one I can think of
> that failed was a case where the hard drive was flaking out.
>
> Here's a web page that shows benchmarks:
>
> http://www.namesys.com/benchmarks.html
>
> -dc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>
>