New Ext3 vs ReiserFS benchmarks
An anonymous reader writes "Saw this new benchmark on the linux-kernel mailing list. Although NAMESYS, the developers of ReiserFS has many benchmarks on their site, they only have one Ext3 benchmark. The new benchmark tests Ext3 in ordered and writeback mode versus ReiserFS with and without the notail mount option. Better than expected results for Ext3. Big difference between ordered and writeback modes."
> Got any proof to back up your claim?
/home and /media at home, but I highly doubt I'll use it for /home on that co-lo'd server again. Nor at work, where the data really is worth money.
...time to put in a new tape for tonights backup....
I do. Where shall I send the bz2'd filesystem image with inaccesable files that causes the kerenl to try to read beyond the end of the partition and causes a deadlock every few days. Yes, I've still got it, I havn't re-used that Logical volume yet, I just made a new one for an ext3 filesystem.
Oh, and this is the SECOND time reiser has done that on this server. It didn't seem to appreciate mbox files.
Get over it people, Reiser is NO WHERE near perfect, yet. Ext2 and even ext3 are much more mature and tested over extended time periods. Don't get me wrong, I use reiser for
- RustyTaco
I don't like the fact that ext3 is now included as a module. The default filesystem driver should be compiled as part of the kernel.
SGI's version of Red Hat is far preferable to Red Hat's own release for this reason.
Now, I must create and maintain an initrd on my IDE system (which was never required before), and I've also been in a crazy situation where attempting to mount an installed filesystem under ext3 caused and Oops, but changing fstab to ext2 was fine.
Down with Red Hat's use of ext3 as a module! Red Hat has never handled journaling in a reasonable manner.