Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Adam Hunt wrote:
> >
> > I'm in the process of building a new system and I was planning on making all
> > my partions RiserFS under 2.4.0. Has anyone done this before? Have there
> > been any latency problems.
i have not run stress tests and multichannel recording, but for
normal work, reiser is just fine.
but you had better wait some more days - people on the reiserfs list
have reported oopsen and fs corruption w/ 2.4.0pre. a fix is
probably on the way.
> There will be latency problems with this setup. Only about 1/4 of the
> latency sources are in ext2. The rest are in the directory cache,
> the inode cache, the virtual memory system and misc.
>
> The LL patch will certainly help. A lot. There may be some
> problems applying it, depending on how much the reiserfs
> patch affects other parts of the kernel.
>
> There's only one way to find out!
i managed to apply the ll patches to test12presomething w/ reiserfs
just fine. otoh, i failed horribly to compile bennos test programs,
so i have had to believe in low latency :)
playing a keyboard through the box felt ok, but i doubt i would
sense less than 5 ms.
andrew, could you maybe copy the reiser folks on this ? i have been
following their
devel list for some time now, but i found no talk of latency issues.
otoh, one could argue that most of reiserfs' features (journalling,
b-tree search etc.) are not needed for audio use with few but large
files and regular backup copies :)
still, an fsck on a 20gig drive can be nasty, especially when you
have a nervous talent knocking at the machine room window :-D
regards,
jörn
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
home://Kurfürstenstr.49.45138.Essen.Germany
phone://+49.201.491621
http://www.folkwang.uni-essen.de/~nettings/
