In the thread on minimum memory size, a couple responders made comments like:
> kreiserfsd No Reiserfs? don't need it. >From experience, this is an ill conceived statement. For data integrity, you need a logged file system in case of system failure (kernel panics, stupid users, whatever) - ext3 or reiser or the like, especially if you have a very large memory and a very active system over a large number of volumes. The example I gave in the thread was SuSE SLES8 SP2 and SuSE's choice of a logged file system is reiser, so the reiserfs deamon is essential. While using ext2, I was rebuilding a root volume a week (40 lpars, 30+ EC of linux). Since the conversion to reiser 7 months ago, I have not had to rebuild one root file system because of damage to the filesystem. On basis would you make the comment that "No Reiserfs? don't need it." For me the questoin migh be: which is better - ext3, reiser, whatever. Redhat votes for ext3, SuSE votes for reiser. Ext2 is not even a contender. Regards, Jim Linux S/390-zSeries Support, SEEL, IBM Silicon Valley Labs t/l 543-4021, 408-463-4021, [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Grace Happens ***
