Slashdot Mirror
Best Shrinkable ReiserFS Replacement?
paulkoan writes "I have been using ReiserFS for my file system across a few servers for some time now (follow the link below for details of my experience). I can't foresee the future of ReiserFS, but if I'm going to have to migrate as support diminishes, I'd like to begin that process now. My criteria are: in-kernel support, shrinkable, and has good recovery when the file system is not closed properly. That shrinkable requirement precludes a lot of options. What's a good replacement for ReiserFS?"
I initially chose ReiserFS because I was building a MythTV system and it was the recommended FS across the board, from small to large files. I've had good experiences with ReiserFS and it has had a pummeling. That MythTV box for example has a very volatile environment and loses power on a regular basis. I haven't lost any data through any of these outages.
Compare this to my brief foray into XFS on the same box, where 25% of the filesystem ended up in lost+found with numbers for filenames. When this happened a second time on a different system I decided XFS wasn't for me — and I really don't get the point of a journalled filesystem that will keep data relatively safe, but then remove any means to identify it when things go wrong.
But everyone has good and bad experiences with filesystems, ReiserFS included. XFS has a good rep, my experience aside.
I initially chose ReiserFS because I was building a MythTV system and it was the recommended FS across the board, from small to large files. I've had good experiences with ReiserFS and it has had a pummeling. That MythTV box for example has a very volatile environment and loses power on a regular basis. I haven't lost any data through any of these outages.
Compare this to my brief foray into XFS on the same box, where 25% of the filesystem ended up in lost+found with numbers for filenames. When this happened a second time on a different system I decided XFS wasn't for me — and I really don't get the point of a journalled filesystem that will keep data relatively safe, but then remove any means to identify it when things go wrong.
But everyone has good and bad experiences with filesystems, ReiserFS included. XFS has a good rep, my experience aside.
My fastest way of checking what operations can be supported on filesystems at the present is by checking what gparted can do. Of the filesystems it works with right now, only four (jfs, reiser4, ufs, xfs) can't be shrunk using gparted.
Ugh, ReiserFS and "good recovery when the file system is not closed properly"? It doesn't even have good recovery after a proper shutdown.
When other filesystems die, the damage is localised. When Reiser fucks up, all or nearly all of the tree is lost. Usually, you'll lose all files bigger than 4KB, although other damage modes are possible.
Reiser has a codebase of an insane size. A relatively small piece of code can be mostly bug-free, Reiser is simply too large, complex and ill-tested. I admit, I haven't given it a try recently but you can guess why I hate the very idea of approaching it without a ten-foot pole.
I've seen XFS screw a number of random files, ext3 mangled only files that were being written to, and my personal favourite is JFS. Even though I use JFS most of the time, the only screwup I witnessed was on a RAID without a write-intent bitmap.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Despite the parent trying to be funny, NTFS does support shrinking. I've used it to shrink a full disk partition down a bit to install a Linux one on the side.
(Now queue 'no room left for Windows on the drive' jokes)
ReiserFS is still being used and maintained in-kernel. It's Stable, and it just works for you and for hundreds of thousands of others; so, what's the rush?
I'd wait for the next batch of next gen FS (BTRFS, Tux3) to show their stuff -- and perhaps take a look at getting involved. Daniel Phillips has recently sent out a call for help... Sounds like you have an itch -- go scratch it.
JFS2 from IBM is the most solid filesystem I've ever seen, but I don't know if such a filesystem works with MythTV.
JFS2 works perfectly with MythTV.
I use JFS exclusively for my MythTV store, because it's the hands-down winner for deletion of large files (something that happens frequently with a MythTV box.)
Note that JFS doesn't support shrinking, so it's not an option for the submitter.
If something rock-solid is needed, one could do worse than continue to use ReiserFS3. (This is what I use.) It's feature-complete, and very stable. I have not had one mishap with it since I implemented it years ago.
But if you want something more bleeding-edge, one could try Reiser4 (development of which I think has stagnated) or btrfs, which seems to implement the main design considerations of Reiser4, but has jagged edges waiting to be cleaned up.
If something stable and under current maintenance is required, a conservative suggestion is of course Ext3.
The general problem with journaling filesystems recovery is not the data not being written (although in some very specific applications it can be required) as most serious apps like databases just fsync what they need on-disk. Problems arise when you have unprotected write cache.
This can happen on SCSI/SAS RAID cards when you force the write cache without a battery, but the most general cause is cheap hardware, especially IDE/SATA disks. For performance reasons they usually have the write cache enabled by default, and in many disks (possibly not many SATA's but this was common on IDE) you can't even disable the write cache (hdparm -W0).
With this kind of configuration, no matter what you do in term of journaling, you will *always* loose data when power fails during I/O operations.
On a side note, if you need data journaling you should probably use an external journal on a separate disk/array. This way the journal device will be doing synchronous writes which is much faster on standard disks.