On Wednesday 28 March 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > On Wednesday 28 March 2007, Alan McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote about 'Re: SOLVED: Recover from LVM errors? (Was: Re: > [gentoo-user] Help - > > system reboots while compiling)': > > All in all, the odds are tipping in favour of ext4 > > I don't need quite such large filesystems as my largest is just under > 4TB, and my system will probably max out around 7TB, but I need a > filesystem that is maintained (Namesys had basically abandoned > reiserfs in favor of reiser4 well before Hans' current troubles > started), and has good all-around performance characteristics (I have > both large source trees, invloving a multitude of directories and > small-ish files AND a video "library" containing very large files in > my /home). I would also like to see some support for the "tail > packing" of resiserfs -- It's not that important, but last I checked > one saved over 100MB by the portage tree on reiserfs AND > mini-benchmarks like emerge --sync and > find '/usr/portage' > /dev/null actually ran faster than ext3.
In my experience that's a representative data set for a Linux geek :-) Mine's very similar and I too find that reiser3 performs better all round. Unpacking 35000 smallish files in a kernel tree is no small task... > That said, I'm very encouraged about ext4, and will probably migrate > some unimportant data over to that filesystem in near future and > perform my own bonnie++ tests. How do you plan to get around the decidedly non-trivial task of getting a decent fsck on a filesystem where plugins handle the metadata? Don't get me wrong, I think reiser4 is a good idea, and it's well thought out. But everything comes at a price, and in this case it's fsck alan -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
