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

[Terry]

On 4/29/06, Chris Cox <cjcox at acm.org> wrote:
> 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.
>

I was speaking from my experience only and have had good luck with
extfs so far and reiserfs is new TO ME. The distros I've been using
have mostly defaulted to extfs and so it's what I've used mostly,
(about 85% extfs 15% reiserfs is my experience). Out of all the Linux
systems I've built I only had one go belly-up and it was reiserfs and
all I did was change the hard drive, I'm still not sure why I lost it,
(I reused the hard drive afterward and it seemed ok), but I rebuilt
the system as ext3 on a new HD. It was for someone else and it's still
running ok far as I know, so that's what I'm basing my "experience"
on.  I do have two now that are running reiserfs and they are doing ok
so far so my one bad experience may have just been an isolated
situation and like I said before I have no real clear idea what really
happened to that one machine, I just ditched it and went with a fresh
install on a new drive.

The comment: "Reiserfs was deployed inside Linux dists before ext3."  
That is an interesting note, (to me), and a comment that makes me
wonder why extfs is so widely used (if reiserfs is better ir more
stable or reliable), but then, the answer may be that it wasn't always
but is now, and I'll just bet the latter is the case.

But...
If you say reiserfs is reliable, it's good enough for me because I
know that you have more experience - and especially with reiserfs -
than me, so I stand corrected.  (And have pretty much changed my
opinion.)

And that is why I am with this group and on this list - to exchange
ideas - to learn. And I have to admit that I have done very little
research on the various file systems, there is lots that I do not know
about the subject, but that may change in the [near] future.  :)

--
<><