Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 03:53:30PM +0100, Simone Felici wrote: > > >>> I've also hear people who have had nightmares with ext3... >>> >>> No filesystem is perfect. >>> >> No filesystem is perfect, that's certainty so. >> > > Sure, no filesystem exhibits *optimal* performance under all work-loads, > but in terms of data integrity, I expect and demand *perfection*. Perhaps > no Linux filesystem is mature/stable enough to meet this standard, > but do not accept less than perfect data integrity from your filesystem: > > - Barring memory corruption, or I/O bus errors, ... the filesystem > is always recoverable at boot time and no files changes committed > with fsync() are lost. > > - Boot time recovery rolls incomplete operations forward or back > as appropriate, and brings the filesystem into a consistent state. > > Past reports of ReiserFS on this list indicate that it falls short > of reasonable (i.e. perfect) data integrity expectations. >
Disk hardware failures, early kernel bugs, vendor issues, all could be reasons for such reports. I did see some reiserfs problems some years ago under redhat, but that was an old 2.4 kernel, redhat didn't officially support reiserfs, and it's no longer relevant IMHO. I will say this much: reiserfs, as shipped in suse enterprise linux, on a 2.6 kernel, has performed flawlessly in our data center, running with lots of disk I/O on a 24/7 basis. We have had power outages, but have never lost a single bit on reiserfs Joe
