Scyld and Red Hat 7
lowther at att.net
Wed Feb 7 05:56:54 PST 2001
Eugene.Leitl at lrz.uni-muenchen.de wrote:
> kragen at pobox.com wrote:
> > IMHO, this is not a particularly good explanation of the situation;
> > metadata-journaling filesystems like ReiserFS sacrifice a little
> > performance in the average case (when everything is working fine) to
> > make fscking after a crash very quick.
> I have the impression ReiserFS also offers much better performance
> and noticeably better raw bit utilization in case of many small files.
> Also, the roadmap is at where the goodies are. It is not just a fs...
> For a good time call:
I have had crashes where fscheck required manual intervention and ended
with the statement: "File system altered!".
Maybe not too bad on an individual node, but I'd rather see the ReiserFS
give me that little "using old" blurb rush by on the head node after a
crash. RSF is effectively putting all that data you crunched into a new
file and keeping the old on hand until the new is successfully written
as opposed to opening the old and overwriting it. If you crash during
the write, you lose that file. Of course, you could always have the
software writing dupicates in case of a crash.
More information about the Beowulf