For a while, there was a recommendation for reiser, perhaps back in SLES 8 or so. But then, I started seeing recommendations for EXT3, which now has been my FS of choice in SLES 9 and SLES 10.
When I reviewed the decision making process, I concluded that EXT3 was just fine for what I want at this time. 10-50 GB file system, not a high performer requirement. I have a DS6800 Ficon attached. Way too fast for my workload at this time. The future may be different, where I trade of some reliability for better performance. (Would I really do that? <G>). Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting >>> Adam Thornton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 7/8/2008 1:19 PM >>> On Jul 8, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Mark Post wrote: > Adam Thornton had at least once instance where reiserfs ate his data > on a system under heavy load. All in all, enough to make someone > running a business to worry. Much worse: it ate a customer's data. Suffice it to say, I no longer use or recommend reiserfs--particularly since the Reiser maintainers' position when I complained was "well, you should be using the newest version." My customer didn't really want to go with a version that, you know, WASN'T SUPPORTED IN THE DISTRIBUTION. Ext3, on the other hand, wasn't all that fast, but WAS quite stable. My feelings about the stability of the filesystem are completely orthogonal to my feelings about the stability of its inventor. Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
