[wellylug] Convert ReiserFS to Ext2

[Phillip Hutchings]

On 4/04/2004, at 10:20 AM, David Antliff wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 andrej at paradise.net.nz wrote:
>> And really: why would you want to do that?
>> Swap reliability and speeed for ext2?
>
> I'd have to disagree with your implied 'reliability' claim. I know 
> quite a
> few people who have had fatal and complete corruptions with recent
> versions of ReiserFS. I would argue that ext2 is considerably more
> reliable. This is just in my own limited experience and therefore 
> purely
> my opinion (although shared by many). I don't use ext2 any more either 
> - I
> mostly use XFS. I have had one filesystem corruption with XFS two years
> ago, but since then it's performed normally.

I've used reiserfs on my root partition for a couple of months now. It 
occasionally has problems (such as when I used it on a dying HD :P), 
but for the most part it's fine. I can't comment on speed as I'm not 
running anything that requires high throughput. Does save a lot of 
space with small files though.

I would say that if you require proven reliability, go with ext2 - it's 
been tested over many years. I would say reiserfs is just as reliable, 
but hasn't had the extensive testing.

> I am aware that my own experience does not prove anything...
>
> Also, I was under the impression that the presence of a journal can 
> slow
> down overall filesystem throughput, since data is written to the 
> journal
> as well as the final write. Is this true?

It's about a 10% penalty on writes, in exchange for a much faster 
restart after a power failure. I'll go with safety ;) Use ext3 if you 
want a journal on ext2.
--
Phillip Hutchings
me at sitharus.com
http://www.sitharus.com/