I just HOSED my gentoo install

[Goosemaster]

I guess ReiserFS doesn't like to be messed around with my other programs.

Basically I had Linux on fist, and THEN wanted to add windows.....usually a mess. I took the HD to another pc and tried QTparted...well now it is hosed. I tried reiserfs check, and now my sdb3 directory, or what used to be root would

a) not mount until I ran reiserfsck --rebuild-sb /dev/sdb3
b) only has one folder on root..."lost&found" and it contians millions of small files




On Your left you will see a sad sad man.

 

[Nothinman]

I wouldn't trust reiserfs with any data I actually wanted, I've had it f' me too many times. I even gave it a second chance a few months ago and it went wacky, so back to ext3 and XFS for me.

 

[Sunner]

I trust ReiserFS enough to run it on the workstation on which Im typing this, but for really important stuff, I agree with Nothinman.
Never had a problem myself, but I've read a bunch of horror stories, I guess I'll have to add yours to the pile, sorry for your loss

 

[Kadarin]

I'm running ReiserFS on my root partition without issue. My system is dual-boot with Win2K, but I installed both OS' at the same time.

 

[Nothinman]

I'm running ReiserFS on my root partition without issue

Give it time...

 

[JustMike]

What about JFS or XFS? Are they any better than Reiser?

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I'm running ReiserFS on my root partition without issue

Give it time...

LOL

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: JustMike
What about JFS or XFS? Are they any better than Reiser?

Good question...Reiser is fast as all hell with small files, and XFS is really good and fast too, but I know JACK about JFS...is it sort of like ext3?


I used to Exclusively use ext3 but DAMN is it SLOOOOW.

 

[JustMike]

I believe XFS is SGI's invention and JFS (journalling filesystem) is IBM's. I use Ext3 on all of my machines, but would like the speed boost of a faster filesystem on my faster machines.

 

[Nothinman]

I've been using XFS since the Linux port hit 1.0 (2001 maybe?) and havn't had any problems with it. The userland utils are great and the people on the linux-xfs mailing list are very helpfull in debugging any problems. I hightly recommend it, and it's been incorported into what will become 2.4.24 also which is a big boost.

JFS is the OS/2 JFS2 port, not the AIX JFS, so the features like ACLs and the like are new but I believe IBM has plans to move AIX to JFS2 eventually after the port is brought up to speed.

 

[silverpig]

IIRC JFS is a little faster than ext3 and it has a very low cpu usage.

I use reiser, never had a problem.

 

[drag]

ReiserFS is weird. The guy who runs that project beleives that each Filesystem should be completely constructed from scratch each time, instead of the evolution that most software needs. Gets good results, the next reiserFS is suppose to be something wonderfull. So each reiserFS numbered releases are totally new.

XFS is the best right now, IMO. Plus they just incorporated it's support in the 2.4 mainstream kernel and will probably show up in the next 2.4.x release, if I am correct.

XFS's most strong point is how it handles very large files. Like +3 gig files. Makes it good for databases and such. SGI created it as a Unix filesystem to for it's multimedia computers. Very wonderfull, giving it to the linux community was one of the better things that ever happened. I call for a blessing on SGI.

Right now the limit for it's size is 2TB filesystems on a 2.4 series kernel and a 32 bit machine and the practical limit on file sizes is like 4GB, but with a real limit of something like 16TB, or something which doesn't make sense to me.

In a 64 bit computer and kernel 2.6 you should be able to handle file sizes of 64TB! with a filesystem max size of like 4 exobytes. Maybe more, XFS is designed from the ground up as a 64bit Unix filesystem, with POSIX-combatable ACLS and everything.

XFS + 2.6 (when it stablises) + 64bit machine = one of the best massive file/database server OS in the world.


Otherwise ext3 is a actually pretty good OS and is very stable. Nice to be backward compatable with ext2 which makes file recovery easier on a damaged machine or hosed OS. It's what I use, because I've been playing with different kernel patches and different features that are incompatable with the xfs patches, but now 2.4 will have XFS support standard and 2.6 will have it by default any future machines will probably be XFS.

Or maybe JFS, which is suppose to be nice to. Of course if the SCO lawsuites turn out badly for IBM, stuff like jfs support will end up having to be pulled from Linux.... JUST KIDDING.

SCO: IBM + Linux OWNZ JOO.

(BTW a judge has ordered SCO to produce the specific stolen code or they will otherwise probably have the court case dismissed. here for some of the details) Also SGI got in trouble with SCO a bit over the XFS stuff, so this court case affects that too a little bit.

 

[Nothinman]

XFS is the best right now, IMO. Plus they just incorporated it's support in the 2.4 mainstream kernel and will probably show up in the next 2.4.x release, if I am correct.

Yes, it's been commited to the 2.4 bk repository (you can get a copy now if you want) and it'll be in 2.4.24 and on.

Right now the limit for it's size is 2TB filesystems on a 2.4 series kernel and a 32 bit machine and the practical limit on file sizes is like 4GB, but with a real limit of something like 16TB, or something which doesn't make sense to me.

Large Block Device patches are available for 2.4 I believe but I probably wouldn't trust them, not that I have an abundance of >2TB block devices laying around.

BTW a judge has ordered SCO to produce the specific stolen code or they will otherwise probably have the court case dismissed. here for some of the details) Also SGI got in trouble with SCO a bit over the XFS stuff, so this court case affects that too a little bit.

The case affects a lot of things, if SCO were to win there would probably be years of effort to rewrite everything and we probably wouldn't get to keep things like XFS and JFS unless a new clean-room implementation was done.

 

[decode]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
I wouldn't trust reiserfs with any data I actually wanted, I've had it f' me too many times.

I have 4 servers and two workstations running it without a problem. In the year I've been using ReiserFS exclusively, I've never had a problem with it. *shrug*

 

[Nothinman]

I have 1 box that's using it (no idea why I used it back then) and it's fine, but my workstation and my Ultra5 both had strange issues crop up that were caused by reiserfs. And with the reiser team rewring the thing every year I've lost faith in them to finish anything.