From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Jul 7 15: 9:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from dc-mx05.cluster1.charter.net (dc-mx05.cluster0.hsacorp.net [209.225.8.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D900337B405 for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 15:09:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from duhring@charter.net) Received: from [24.217.157.157] (HELO dave) by dc-mx05.cluster1.charter.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 13747215; Sat, 07 Jul 2001 18:14:59 -0400 Message-ID: <002901c1075b$5c524b40$0300a8c0@uhring.com> From: "Dave Uhring" To: "Bill Moran" Cc: References: <200107071638.SAA19610@lurza.secnetix.de> <01070711475500.00362@dave> <3B476285.43347BA1@nasby.net> <000d01c1074e$49d31ba0$0300a8c0@uhring.com> <3B477970.2CD1B73B@iowna.com> Subject: Re: JFS Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 22:09:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Moran" Cc: Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 4:04 PM Subject: Re: JFS > Dave Uhring wrote: > > You seem to have missed the critical point of that paper. When the > > system goes completely haywire and either crashes or locks up so hard > > that a manual reset is required, UFS/softupdates requires a substantial > > amount of time to run fsck. If you have a very large filesystem, you > > then have to w....a....i....t until fsck completes. And if you are > > lucky, it will not terminate with the suggestion that you run fsck by > > hand. With a true journalling filesystem this wait is obviated. The > > last transactions are rerun or truncated and the system boots up. > > Actually ... according to the article, the system boots up and _then_ > determines what needs done to repair the filesystem. > > Also, the lack of a need for fscking is not the only benefit of > RieserFS. In fact, it's a _minor_ improvement. If your system is > going down so often that the speed of a fsck is a major factor in the > layout of the system, you've got other issues you need to address > first! > The other issues that might make Reiserfs a good idea (and a possible > improvement over UFS) are the various improvements such as small > file storage and large directory storage. I know that I'm interested > in seeing performance comparisons with regard to these factors, and > so far, I've seen none that compare ReiserFS to UFS/softupdates. > > My $.02 > > -Bill > As I indicated, my experience with ReiserFS is limited. I have been using SGI's XFS for Linux for a short time and am quite pleased with its performance and filesystem integrity. If you have a spare system available, it's easy enough to try it out. http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/1.0_installer.html Also requires the 2 install CDs for RedHat-7.1. SGI's ftp site has a patch available to bring up XFS on Linux-2.4.5 kernel, also. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message