[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060801165234.9448cb6f.reiser4@blinkenlights.ch>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 16:52:34 +0200
From: Adrian Ulrich <reiser4@...nkenlights.ch>
To: "Horst H. von Brand" <vonbrand@....utfsm.cl>
Cc: bernd-schubert@....de, reiserfs-list@...esys.com,
jbglaw@...-owl.de, clay.barnes@...il.com, rudy@...ons.demon.nl,
vonbrand@....utfsm.cl, ipso@...ppymail.ca, reiser@...esys.com,
lkml@...productions.com, jeff@...zik.org, tytso@....edu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org
regarding reiser4 inclusion
> > While filesystem speed is nice, it also would be great if reiser4.x would be
> > very robust against any kind of hardware failures.
>
> Can't have both.
..and some people simply don't care about this:
If you are running a 'big' Storage-System with battery protected
WriteCache, Mirroring between 2 Datacenters, snapshotting.. etc..
you don't need your filesystem beeing super-robust against bad sectors
and such stuff because:
a) You've paid enough money to let the storage care about
Hardware issues.
b) If your storage is on fire you can do a failover using the mirror.
c) And if someone ran dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/sda you could
even rollback your Snapshot.
(Btw: i did this once to a Reiser4 filesystem (overwritten about
1.2gb). fsck.reiser4 --rebuild-sb was able to fix it.)
..but what you really need is a flexible and **fast** filesystem: Like
Reiser4.
(Yeah.. yeah.. i know: ext3 is also flexible and fast.. but Reiser4
simply is *MUCH* faster than ext3 for 'my' workload/application).
Regards,
Adrian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists