[NTLUG:Discuss] [Bulk] Re: ext3 waste disk spaces then Windows ME?

[Chris Cox]

Terry wrote:
...
> 
> Until such time as someone convences me that ReiserFS is as reliable
> and problem free as ext3 I'm sticking with tried and proven ext3.
> (Hard drives are cheap, I'm not all that concerned about wasting 5%).

And who proved that ext3 was reliable?  Sorry... but the logic
is nonsense.

Since reiserfs is the default for SUSE, pretty much all enterprise
deployments of SUSE use reiserfs.  With that said, my experiences
with Red Hat and reiserfs haven't been nearly as good since
ext3 is clearly Red Hat's favorite... they keep ext3 up to date,
but sort of care less about reiserfs.

My best advice,  If you use SUSE, use reiserfs, it's very stable.
If you use Red Hat, use their choice, ext3.

If you use something else... I'd say you have a world of choice.
But ext3 IS NOT more stable than reiserfs.  And it is wrong
to assume that.

Reiserfs was deployed inside  Linux  dists before ext3.
Keep that in mind.