linux-kernel - Re: Reiser4. BEST FILESYSTEM EVER

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 08 Apr 2007 22:14:18 -0700
From:	johnrobertbanks@...tmail.fm
To:	"Richard Knutsson" <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
Cc:	"Christer Weinigel" <christer@...nigel.se>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	reiserfs-list@...esys.com
Subject: Re: Reiser4. BEST FILESYSTEM EVER - Christer Weinigel

On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:58:53 +0200, "Richard Knutsson"
<ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se> said:
> Wow, I'm impressed. Think you got the record on how many mails you 
> referenced to in a reply... 

TWO actually. I guess you are easily impressed.

A simple cut and paste error.

> You have got some rude answers and you have called them back on it 

Yeah, I (fairly closely) mimicked their behavior to make a point.

> + you have repeated the same statement several times, that is 
> not the best way of convincing people.

I know you DON'T believe that, as you are about the tenth person to
repeat that "repeating stuff has no effect."

> I believe you picked up the "anti-Reiser religion"-phrase from previous 
> rant-wars (otherwise, why does that "religion"-phrase always come up, 
> and (almost) only when dealing with Reiser-fs), and yes, there has been 
> some clashes caused by both sides, so please be careful when dealing 
> with this matter.

NO. You people simply come across as zealots who work together, against
Reiser4.

Hence the term "anti-Reiser religion."

> Would you be willing to benchmark Reiser4 with some compressed 
> binary-blob and show the time as well as the CPU-usage? 

I might be. I don't really know how to set it all up.

Perhaps if you guided me through it.

> >
> > You deliberately ignored the fact that bad blocks are NOT dealt with by
> > the filesystem,... but by the operating system. Like I said: If your
> > filesystem is writing to bad blocks, then throw away your operating
> > system.
> >   

> I may have missed something, but if my room-mate took my harddrive, 
> screwed it open, wrote a love-letter on the disk with a pencil and then 
> returned it (ok, there may be some more plausible reasons for 
> corruption), is the OS really suppose to handle it? 

Yeah, I can't see how the OS could read the love-letter either.

But one thing is for sure. The FS ain't responsible for reading it.

> Yes, it should not 
> assign any new data to those blocks but should it not also fall into the 
> file-systems domain to be able to restore some/all data?

It's a tough ask of any FS. 

Microsoft's filesystem checker totally roasted all my data on an XP-box
last night. 

I had used ntfsresize to reduce the partition size and had a power
outage. 

Later, Windows booted, ran the filesystem checker, seemed OK. 

Next time I boot, all I get is Input/Output error.

> 
> Just my 2c to the pond
> Richard Knutsson
> 
Addin my 2c
John.
-- 
  
  johnrobertbanks@...tmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

-
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/