I won't comment on the differing methods, but from every test I have seen comparing reiserfs and ext3, overall reiserfs kills the performance of ext3 by a largish margin... I have also had heaps of powerouts, (the downside of having offices in a 18 story building with construction going on all around and on it... not all the systems have ups's,, and not once have I lost anything with the reiserfs systems... it impressed the hell out of me... rgds Frank -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Oscar Sent: Wednesday, 5 September 2001 2:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [expert] Ext3: journaling metadata or the file contents? Hi, I have read this from Rajesh Fowkar: ----- "1. Most journaling fs's currently journal only the metadata (information about inode allocation and so on -- internal structural information about the state of the filesystem), but do NOT actually journal the contents of files. This means that despite the journaling, it IS possible to lose some data if you have, say, a loss of power (although it is NOT possible to actually corrupt the filesystem itself). I believe only ext3 journals the file content data. The ext3 developers claim this is not only better protection for your files, but also a performance boost, since all synchronous file writes are made to the journaling file only, and written out to the "real" files asynchronously." ----- What do you think about this? It is true that ReiserFS does not journal the data and ext3 does it? Thanks, �scar. -- Usuario de Linux Registrado #227443
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
