From: John Madden (no email)
Date: Mon Oct 15 2001 - 14:48:39 EDT
>> Reiserfs, as discussed here not too long ago, apparently has problems.
>> It's also slightly slower than ext2 because of its journaling. Since
>> it's a less-mature filesystem than ext2, and its only benefit is a
>> faster fsck at boot (which only happens after an abnormal shutdown or
>> a crash), I don't see why you'd want to risk it.
>
> Are you *REALLY* sure the *ONLY* benefit of reiserfs is the "faster
> fsck at boot"?
When it comes to a SOHO server, yeah, I'd say reiserfs isn't going to gain
him much. Despite ext2's drawbacks (lacking journaling), I've still never
lost a filesystem on it that wasn't related to hardware blowing up.
I did go and check out their benchmarks just now though, and the results
aren't as straightforward as I remembered -- reiser does appear to
outperform ext2 in some situations. However, I'll stick by my conclusion
until someone shows me benchmarks of a reiserfs mail spool saving them a
measurable amount of time while pushing 300 msgs/day. :)
John
-- John Madden UNIX Systems Engineer Ivy Tech State College - To unsubscribe, send mail to with content (not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users
|
|
|