Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 20:41, Hans Reiser wrote: yad stuf wrote: When will users be assured that they won't be left in the dust with some older version of ReiserFS, supported only by half-beta-half-release, quota and NFS -incapable, non-GPL'ed filesystem code; a The code is GPL'd, NFS works, and it is stable code. I've found that ReiserFS is very, very stable (no problems at all). But is it actually marked as stable in the 2.4 kernels? difficult-to-use and apparently buggy reiserfsck See most recent release of reiserfsck. Best part is that you don't have to run fsck under most circumstances. (compared to e2fsck) and demands by Hans Reiser for $25 to say anything? and RedHat charges you how much for a support call? Microsoft? See attachment. And yad stuff should know that $25 let's you talk straight to the developers -- you can't get better support than that. pesarif
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
Hello! Hmm... is bigpond.com is another fre web-mail stuff to help trolls to grow? :) On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 08:43:59PM +1100, _nasturtium wrote: Interestingly, Hans Reiser defends his business model by stating They wouldn't send an email like this to their medical doctor expecting a free diagnosis. referring to how users baulk at paying the $25. Well, fortunately public health insurance and bulk billing means my GP doesn't charge me a cent. ;-) Perhaps Hans Reiser should add his opinion...(hint hint) Hmm. I wonder if you can insure against programmign error? Can you provide a quote of insurance pays? :) Read the Support page and you find it is used only once every few days! (And Hmm... Perhaps this just means a lot of people do not need any support because there is no problems at all ;) for good financial reason). It is actually $25 per hour for fsck questions (apparently competitive linux support companies charge $250, but probably No. Just for almost any question that will take less than hour answering. collapsed by now), and $5000/programmer/month for a SINGLE FEATURE. Yuo call that expensive? Ask Miscrosoft how much will it cost to implement $MFT packing in NTFS. Ask how much will it cost to implement file tails packing (we are not speaking of putting small files in MFT) in NTFS. $5k/month means just only $29 per hour. Besides, how can Reiser charge for support on something that other developers contributed to??? No problems. Microsoft charge for IE support though IE was stolen from SpyGlass. RedHat, SuSE and others charge for support of Linux though other developers contributed to it. And in fact Hans Reiser actually funds reiserfs development. He pays salaries to the people developing reiserfs. Bye, Oleg
[reiserfs-list] ReiserFS kernel compatibility
Hello, Does anyone know if it is possible to use Reiser as root, user and home partitions in Peanut Linux? It was recommended on the Linux Mandrake mailing list as a 299MB installation (99MB download) for low end systems, and with Reiser3.6 I'm hoping to save some more space. Furthermore, and almost more importantly, I'd like to announce KTuberling (also known as Mr Potato Guy Identity Kit) runs on Peanut Linux! Thanks in advance, (unless you plan to charge me) _nasturtium P.S. My support budget for this week is $2.50.
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 20:53, Hans Reiser wrote: _nasturtium wrote: Besides, how can Reiser charge for support on something that other developers contributed to??? Because almost all the developers financially depend on me. I can't hire several of the new developers I want because I can't pay them even half of what they get working elsewhere. Hans I was reading the FAQ on www.namesys.com and it seems Reiser4 is sponsored (but not endorsed by...) by DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency?). That seems like a good source of funds compared to your support business - your Support page only claims one request/payment every few days. Does the name of Jeremy Fitzhardinge come to mind? While I recognise that most developers are paid, the aforementioned happens to be Volunteer. Author of hashing code. (teahash.c). Surely the open source model would allow more contributors. Regards, _nasturtium
Re: [reiserfs-list] ReiserFS kernel compatibility
Hello! On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 09:06:22PM +1100, _nasturtium wrote: Does anyone know if it is possible to use Reiser as root, user and home partitions in Peanut Linux? It was recommended on the Linux Mandrake If they use linux kernel 2.2 or 2.4, it is possible. You may need to recompile their kernel to include in-kernel reiserfs support, though. (if they do not include it by default). mailing list as a 299MB installation (99MB download) for low end systems, and with Reiser3.6 I'm hoping to save some more space. reiserfs 3.6 is only implemented for 2.4 and 2.5 kernel series. You can use reiserfs 3.5 with linux kernel 2.2. It will give you same space savings, but will limit your files to be less than 2G in size. Also some NFS (server) disadvantages. Bye, Oleg
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 20:59, Oleg Drokin wrote: Hello! Hmm... is bigpond.com is another fre web-mail stuff to help trolls to grow? :) Actually, Bigpond.com is a commercial ISP...besides, since you happen to have a namesys.com email address (which I could equally draw conclusions about) perhaps you would find I joined the reiser list today and read archives... Regards, _nasturtium
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
_nasturtium wrote: Go over to http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2001/Dec01/12-17pss.asp in Konqueror, Lynx or your favorite web browser and you will find gasp unprecedented range of no-charge services and support tools just in time for holiday season. Now thats a nice touch (but then again, the antitrust case is about to be settled). Regards, _nasturtium Namesys also provides free support to all persons who buy ReiserFS.:) Hans
[reiserfs-list] where is a win9x driver for reiserfs?
hi, as suggested by hans, i put this request to the mailing list: could anybody please point me to a reiserfs driver for win9x type os? thanks all, mats _ Mats WolpersTel +49.89.72.22.96.36 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 10:37:39PM -0800, yad stuf wrote: I just upgraded all my systems from ReiserFS 3.5 to 3.6. But to my horror, it seems that the on-disk format will change (again) with the release of ReiserFS 4 this year. Reiser4 is a completely different filesystem to ReiserFS 3.5/3.6, and should be treated as such. If Hans and Co. provide an upgrade path from 3.5/3.6 - 4, that'd be swell, but since it sports a completely different feature set, don't count on it. I don't see what the problem is, though -- the 2.2 kernels use the 3.5 disk format, and the 2.4 kernels can read both the 3.5 and 3.6 disk format. AFAIK the only compelling reason you'd want to upgrade from 3.5 to 3.6 is to get Large File Support, which 2.2 doesn't support anyway. If you do want to upgrade, a simple remount with a '-o conv' converts the disk format. It's not like anything breaks. When will the on-disk format of ReiserFS stabilize? (I mean there aren't 3 or 4 incompatible versions of ext2, AFAIK) I'm guesstimating that the reiserfs layout will probably never stabilise. ext2 is designed as a traditional UNIX filesystem, and it doesn't need much of a disk layout change. Reiser4 has different goals and a different architecture from Reiser3; it would be mayhem to have both fs' use the some disk layout, for maintenance and performance reasons (let alone whether it's feasible architecturally). When will users be assured that they won't be left in the dust with some older version of ReiserFS, supported only by half-beta-half-release, quota and NFS -incapable, non-GPL'ed filesystem code; a difficult-to-use and apparently buggy reiserfsck (compared to e2fsck) and demands by Hans Reiser for $25 to say anything? You'll never be 'left in the dust' since you can always use whatever (older) kernel works for you. I don't think Reiser3 will go away for a _long_ time from the mainstream kernel, and Reiser4 will simply be an additional filesystem. If, one day, Namesys suddenly don't support Reiser3 any more, the source is there, so others can hack on it. Also, who said that Hans Reiser demands $25 from every user? If you want premium support, you pay for it, much like you hire a kernel hacker if you really want something in the kernel. For the typical end-user, reiserfs is as free as the Linux kernel; you don't have to pay a cent. -- #ozone/algorithm [EMAIL PROTECTED] - trust.in.love.to.save
Re: [reiserfs-list] Yet another experimental hash.
Stephen Dennis writes:
The approach is a combination of Alder32 and CRC-32. Alder32 is fast
for long requests because the compiler can parallize the internal
loop. However, it's relatively slow on short requests because of a
modulus operation that happens even on single-byte keys.
On the other hand, a CRC-32 is perfect for short requests and fast,
but for long requests, it's about twice as slow because the compiler
can't take break down the data dependencies of the CRC-32's LSR.
The following is a combination of the two. It's the fastest hash that
I've profiled for both long and short requests. There are no
expensive operations, and it's guaranteed to give a unique hash for
keys less than or equal to 4 bytes.
However, after exchanging E-mail with Jedi, it appears ReiserFS
needs similiar keys to produce similar but not exact hashes.
Whereas the following is designed to produce very distributed hash
values for all keys including similar ones.
Still, it's food for thought.
You can test it experimentally also: add your hash into
fs/reiserfs/hashes.c, add new mount option (if this seems too complex,
just replace body of u32 yura_hash (const signed char *msg, int len)
with your hash), run attached program and watch when hash buckets start
to overflow and what is average file creation speed. Compare with other
hashes. As a side note it would be interesting to do this for wide range
of hashes, like FNV1, etc.
Stephen Dennis (AKA Brazil)
www.svdltd.com
www.tinymux.com
ftp://ftp.svdltd.com/TinyMUX/beta
Nikita.
#include stdio.h
#include unistd.h
#include fcntl.h
#include errno.h
#include time.h
#define MAX_LEN (20)
#define CYCLE (2)
#define RAT( a, b ) ( ( ( double ) ( a ) ) / ( ( double ) ( b ) ) )
int main( int argc, char **argv )
{
const char alphabet[] = 0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ;
unsigned long i;
char name[ MAX_LEN + 1 ];
int min;
int base;
time_t start;
time_t instant;
unsigned long prev;
int ebusy;
base = strlen( alphabet );
memset( name, base + 10, MAX_LEN + 1 );
ebusy = 0;
prev = 0;
instant = start = time( NULL );
for( i = 0 ; ; ++ i )
{
int j;
int c;
int fd;
char fname[ MAX_LEN + 1 ];
for( j = MAX_LEN - 1, c = 1 ; ( j = 0 ) c ; -- j )
{
c = 0;
if( name[ j ] == base + 10 )
{
name[ j ] = 1;
min = j;
}
else if( name[ j ] == base - 1 )
{
c = 1;
name[ j ] = 0;
}
else
{
name[ j ] ++;
}
}
if( c == 1 )
{
exit( 1 );
}
for( j = min ; j MAX_LEN ; ++ j )
{
fname[ j - min ] = alphabet[ ( int ) name[ j ] ];
}
fname[ MAX_LEN - min ] = 0;
fd = open( fname, O_CREAT, 0777 );
if( fd == -1 )
{
if( errno != EBUSY )
{
perror( open );
printf( %li files created\n, i );
exit( 2 );
}
else
{
ebusy ++;
}
}
close( fd );
if( ( i % CYCLE ) == 0 )
{
time_t now;
now = time( NULL );
printf( %li files: %li (%f/%f), %i\n, i, time( NULL ) - instant,
( now - start ) ? RAT( i, now - start ) : 0.0,
( now - instant ) ? RAT( i - prev, now - instant ) : 0.0,
ebusy );
instant = time( NULL );
prev = i;
}
}
}
Re: [reiserfs-list] Yet another experimental hash.
Ragnar Kjørstad writes: On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 01:17:57PM -0800, Stephen Dennis wrote: The approach is a combination of Alder32 and CRC-32. Alder32 is fast for long requests because the compiler can parallize the internal loop. However, it's relatively slow on short requests because of a modulus operation that happens even on single-byte keys. Intuetively I would think that hash calculation time was almost neglectable compared to the other operations of opening a file (disk IO in particular). Has anyone done calculations or profiling to find out for sure if it's relevant? Tea hash is ten times slower on some file creation patterns than r5. This can hardly be explained by computational overhead, so, yes, it's io caused by randomness that matters. However, after exchanging E-mail with Jedi, it appears ReiserFS needs similiar keys to produce similar but not exact hashes. Well, it depends on your accesspatterns - if you tend to create and access your files in a particular order there are (huge) performance improvements from a hash that sort the files in this particular order. If access is totally random, a well distributed hash will work best. -- Ragnar Kjørstad Big Storage Nikita.
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
Jens Benecke wrote: Just as file systems like NTFS never stabilize. NT 3.51's NTFS was infamous for panicking in the middle of a swap operation and umounting all disks, then crashing because it couldn't note this crash in the event log on one of the umounted disks ;) NT4 still did this occasionally and had some pretty severe data corruption bugs. With win2k, the NTFS was apparently completely rewritten, it was still called NTFS but was now suddenly incompatible with OS/2 for example (which wasn't the case before). Windows XP's NTFS is again a big change, supports bigger disks and files, and the new incompatible 'dynamic disks' (which is something akin to md devices under Linux). What has happened to NTFS performance? During the Windows NT 3.5 days it was the slowest FS in production use, particularly for small files. Has this changed? (Should I go from FAT32 to NTFS on my laptop windows partition? Fear of performance loss has kept me from doing so.) Hans
[reiserfs-list] magic is useless Determining File Types
Alexander G. M. Smith wrote: Raphael Bosshard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:51:03 +0100: What do you think about the filetype beeing just another attribute? How difficult would it be to realize? Not so difficult, in my oppinion, but I am most certainly wrong. BeOS does do file types that way. The values used are MIME types, so it's a lot more precise than file extensions (for example, type text/html is openable by both HTML specific programs and generic text editors). But extensions and magic are used by a background daemon to determine the file type for data that doesn't already have a MIME type. Incidentally, their attribute naming convention uses BEOS:TYPE to identify the file type attribute, since BEOS: is prepended to all OS specific attributes. The attributes also have a simple datatype associated (integer-32, integer-64, float-32, double-64, plain string, MIME string, etc). There's also an optional indexing system for finding files with particular attribute values very quickly, but that's a topic for another day. So, yes, it's a good idea particularly when the rest of the OS actually uses it. - Alex I think I might be willing to do it in Reiser4, if you are willing to do the work of creating a consensus that it should be noticed and set in user land. You would want contact Miguel, Martin, and Richard. Others probably also. You should be willing to write 30 itty bitty patches to user land things yourself. Hans
Re: [reiserfs-list] magic is useless Determining File Types
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 01:15, Alexander G. M. Smith wrote: Same thing for BeOS - floppies are FAT16 format (you can format for BFS but with the journal etc, there's 300KB of space for data), there's also FAT32 for Windows disk partitions and several other file systems. Some, like Mac HFS support a limited number of attributes (just the ones which have a Mac equivalent). Still, they got used by most of the regular applications written for BeOS, even if just used to specify the file type. Though if you used POSIX commands (like cp), the attributes would get lost. ZIP format If even cp doesn't support it then it's useless. This is why multiple streams were useless on NT because the cmd.exe copy command didn't support them (presumably nothing has changed with XP). So, if it's available and useful then there's a good chance people will use it in new software. When even the authors of the OS don't support it in their core file copy utility then it's not getting used much. On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 01:48, Jens Benecke wrote: Microsoft has these problems with their NTFS attributes. All the office type apps and so on were pressed hard to make heavy use of these attributes: you can e.g. view author, etc. of a MS-Word file in the file properties dialog, or the download URL of a .zip file, just like OS/2 did in 1996 :) but apart from that, nobody is really using these features, because you still *CAN* install Windows on FAT partitions and there you don't have these features. OS/2 had extended attributes in 1988. OS/2 had a fully object-oriented desktop using EAs in every imaginable way in 1992. By 1996 OS/2 was seriously losing market-share, mind-share, and IBM support. On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:48, Raphael Bosshard wrote: The idea of putting the filetype (ie. as MIME) into an additional file-attribute is not new and has done before by various systems, including OS/2, BeOS and even Windows. But in these cases, limitations of the FAT-Filesystem prevented an adoption of this feature. In the Unix-enviroment, it would fail because of standards and laziness; most of the file manipulating tools would have to be rewritten or to be patched. Right? Well, at least it was a nice idea... ;) I'm not sure it was such a nice idea really. Mainframes and mini-computers had typed files before Unix was invented. Unix was one of the earlier OSs to use strictly non-typed files (a file is just a collection of bytes). CP/M, DOS, etc all just followed that example. If we're going to experiment with new things, then how about indexed files managed by the file system which allow hardware devices such as EMC machines to do the database operations. This is why an IBM zSystem running OS/390 will beat almost anything for bulk IO while the same zSystem running Linux will apparently give poor IO performance. -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: [reiserfs-list] When will Reiserfs be ready?
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:14, _nasturtium wrote: I was reading the FAQ on www.namesys.com and it seems Reiser4 is sponsored (but not endorsed by...) by DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency?). That seems like a good source of funds compared to your support business - your Support page only claims one request/payment every few days. You should try running a business when you grow up. Then you will discover the perilous position that having only a single customer can place you in. Does the name of Jeremy Fitzhardinge come to mind? While I recognise that most developers are paid, the aforementioned happens to be Volunteer. Author of hashing code. (teahash.c). Surely the open source model would allow more contributors. The model is open. The code is all released under the GPL and anyone who wishes can write new features or fix bugs. The reason why almost everyone who writes ReiserFS code works for Hans is that he appears to make a job offer to anyone who writes some ReiserFS code. Quite some time ago Chris Mason appeared from no-where, started contributing patches for ReiserFS, wrote the journalling code and got hired by Hans. There is always the option of forking ReiserFS if enough intelligent people believe that Hans is doing the wrong thing. So far there have been discussions about a number of issues, but the consensus of opinion among people who matter is that Hans is doing a reasonably good job. -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
