I 've been using ext3 and reiserfs for somedays with 2.4.7. Using
mkreiserfs I recieved some null pointer problems and recieved a
kernel oops.
Odd --- nobody else has reported this. Can you plese supply more
details (ksymoops) such that these bugs may be fixed.
While ext3 is mounted as fast as ext2, reiserfs seems is slower.
Slower to mount? Or slower to use?
ext3, 10 GB: ~ 0.5 seconds reisferfs 10 GB: ~ 3-5 seconds
Probably journal replay, still, you might have slow disks. A journal
reply for me of 60+ events takes about 1 second on a single spindle
(SCSI, U160).
Generating the journal with tune2fs was again much faster than
mkreiserfs. But I think this is because reiser creates a new fs,
wherefore mkfs.ext2 did that before.
Yes.
Do it really matter (within reason) which fs mounts and is made
faster? It's not something you do every other minute.
While running there occured some problems with reiserfs.
Such as?
I am wondering that reiserfs first got into the kernel before
ext3!
It was ready first (mostly).
--cw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/