Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
So, still no reiser4 in official LiveCDs
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Unsupported Software
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We'll be right here when all you RR4 hipsters come back with a massive FS crash (what happened to me)

Just because RR4 survived one crash and EXT3 didn't survive another - that's not a benchmark. Did you set up both crashes in a controlled environment where the only variable involved was the FS? I didn't think so. I tried RR4 and after every hard reset, HELL, after some regular shut downs, I'd lose data, and eventually it all just came crashing down. The FS simply stopped functioning, and I don't even think it was after a hard reset. It told me the FS was irreparable. I've since switched to JFS and have never been happier. After many a hard reset, including an all out power outage, I have lost no data and the journal is restored perfectly when I turn it back on. *shrugs* If you really intend to run RR4 on your system, at least back up frequently so you don't curse the world when the inevitable does just happen.
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cinder6
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 767
Location: California

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wasn't setting up crashes...they were real crashes. I never said they were benchmarks, just personal experiences.
_________________
Knowledge is power.
Power corrupts.
Study hard.
Be evil.

Ugly Overload
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cinder6 wrote:
I wasn't setting up crashes...they were real crashes. I never said they were benchmarks, just personal experiences.


That's what I'm saying. Your personal experience doesn't make RR4 more stable than ext3. To assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable is essentially dumb and just asking for trouble. Like I said, the next thread you should look at is "How to easily make a stage4 back up".
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dlareh
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 2102

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrWoland wrote:
To assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable is essentially dumb and just asking for trouble

Whose arse are you pulling this supposed assertion from?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dlareh wrote:
DrWoland wrote:
To assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable is essentially dumb and just asking for trouble

Whose arse are you pulling this supposed assertion from?


Cinder6 wrote:
I have had a similar situation as gimpel, which is what led me to try reiser4. After one hard reset, my ext3 was totally destroyed: fsck had to eradicate over half the damn filesystem, including the journal (system then thought it was ext2. How cute). Needless to say, I had to reinstall. I chose reiser4. When I came into a similar situation with reiser4, I lost NO files, and the journal was intact (though I had to spend about an hour on the fsck process because there were some errors--but none were irreperable).


Hmmm?
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dlareh
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 2102

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrWoland wrote:
Dlareh wrote:
DrWoland wrote:
To assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable is essentially dumb and just asking for trouble

Whose arse are you pulling this supposed assertion from?


Cinder6 wrote:
I have had a similar situation as gimpel, which is what led me to try reiser4. After one hard reset, my ext3 was totally destroyed: fsck had to eradicate over half the damn filesystem, including the journal (system then thought it was ext2. How cute). Needless to say, I had to reinstall. I chose reiser4. When I came into a similar situation with reiser4, I lost NO files, and the journal was intact (though I had to spend about an hour on the fsck process because there were some errors--but none were irreperable).


Hmmm?

And?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dlareh wrote:
DrWoland wrote:
Dlareh wrote:
DrWoland wrote:
To assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable is essentially dumb and just asking for trouble

Whose arse are you pulling this supposed assertion from?


Cinder6 wrote:
I have had a similar situation as gimpel, which is what led me to try reiser4. After one hard reset, my ext3 was totally destroyed: fsck had to eradicate over half the damn filesystem, including the journal (system then thought it was ext2. How cute). Needless to say, I had to reinstall. I chose reiser4. When I came into a similar situation with reiser4, I lost NO files, and the journal was intact (though I had to spend about an hour on the fsck process because there were some errors--but none were irreperable).


Hmmm?

And?


... Are you a challenged reader? What are you asking?
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dlareh
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 2102

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He accuses me of being a challenged reader? :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dlareh wrote:
He accuses me of being a challenged reader? :roll:


... He stated that he decided to stick with RR4 based on his experience from those two crashes. I disagreed, saying that using a statistical extreme to select your FS was foolish. What the hell are you talking about?
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dlareh
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 2102

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrWoland wrote:
Dlareh wrote:
He accuses me of being a challenged reader? :roll:

... He stated that he decided to stick with RR4 based on his experience from those two crashes.

No, he did not state "that he decided to stick with RR4 based on his experience from those two crashes. "

Neither did he "assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable".

The issue of "sticking with" did NOT come up in this discussion, and is a figment of your imagination. All we know is that he tried RR4 after his ext3 filesystem crashed, and that it has apparently been stable for him since then.

Quote:
I disagreed, saying that using a statistical extreme to select your FS was foolish.

You disagreed with an imaginary assertion.
Quote:
What the hell are you talking about?

That would be your misrepresentation of what Cinder6 said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SoTired
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 5:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chaosite wrote:
There won't be any Reiser4 on official LiveCDs and Vanillas anytime soon, not until reiser4 is fixed and Hans Reiser (The official hair critic of lkml) get an attitude readjustment.


Actually, since the conclusion of this thread it looks as though the ball may be rolling on reiser4 getting into vanilla, sans the VFS changes. In the very least reiser4's now getting at least some independent review, which is not a bad first step.

After all, Andrew Morton's orginal plans for reiser4 in 2.6.13 were "Merge it, I guess." (Half-hearted as it may be) That's progress.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 6:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dlareh wrote:
DrWoland wrote:
Dlareh wrote:
He accuses me of being a challenged reader? :roll:

... He stated that he decided to stick with RR4 based on his experience from those two crashes.

No, he did not state "that he decided to stick with RR4 based on his experience from those two crashes. "

Neither did he "assert that because once RR4 crashed and recovered ok and once ext3 crashed and didn't recover RR4 is more stable".

The issue of "sticking with" did NOT come up in this discussion, and is a figment of your imagination. All we know is that he tried RR4 after his ext3 filesystem crashed, and that it has apparently been stable for him since then.

Quote:
I disagreed, saying that using a statistical extreme to select your FS was foolish.

You disagreed with an imaginary assertion.
Quote:
What the hell are you talking about?

That would be your misrepresentation of what Cinder6 said.


This thread is about him wanting RR4 support in Vanilla, since his system is obviously mostly RR4. He bases his decision to run RR4 on his personal experience, which, being a statistical extreme, has been good. I disagree with his decision, since the majority of people who try running RR4, including myself, eventually run into problems. You're not even splitting hairs, you're just all out trolling.
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dlareh
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 2102

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not trolling nor splitting hairs. You on the other hand are clearly making stuff up.
_________________
"Mr Thomas Edison has been up on the two previous nights discovering 'a bug' in his phonograph." --Pall Mall Gazette (1889)
Are we THERE yet?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
crazycat
l33t
l33t


Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 838
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are to many statistical extremes to actually be statical extremes. reiser4 is not perfect - it doesn't play nice with xattr , it uses more cpu and it is limited to only 2 archs at the moment, still, from my personal test ut2k4 lolads much faster on reiser4, which might be pure subjective impression. Anyway , when I have some more free time i will benchmark "loading time" for sure. The next nice benchmark would be linking temporary portage work directory on different fs's and measure the time to emerge for example kdelibs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cinder6
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 767
Location: California

PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
This thread is about him wanting RR4 support in Vanilla, since his system is obviously mostly RR4. He bases his decision to run RR4 on his personal experience, which, being a statistical extreme, has been good. I disagree with his decision, since the majority of people who try running RR4, including myself, eventually run into problems. You're not even splitting hairs, you're just all out trolling.


Well, I started trying reiser4 arbitrarily after being forced to reformat, because I felt like trying a new fs (was a bit ticked with ext3 at the time). Reiser4 has been good to me thus far, and I have had no reason to change it to something else. Many may have trouble with it, but I haven't, just like most have trouble writing with their left hand, but, again, I don't.
_________________
Knowledge is power.
Power corrupts.
Study hard.
Be evil.

Ugly Overload
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrWoland
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 603

PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's nice, but for your own sake, frequent backups.
_________________
I'm not a Guru, I just ask a lot of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cinder6
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 767
Location: California

PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 5:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrWoland wrote:
That's nice, but for your own sake, frequent backups.


Good advice in any situation.
_________________
Knowledge is power.
Power corrupts.
Study hard.
Be evil.

Ugly Overload
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yngwin
Retired Dev
Retired Dev


Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrWoland wrote:
Just because RR4 survived one crash and EXT3 didn't survive another - that's not a benchmark.

I don't care about benchmarks. I care about what's happening to my system. That's why personal experience is very sensible to use as a guide here.

I used to live in Greece, where power-outs are frequent. In case something like that happens, I want my FS to survive. In my experience only Reiser4 has been rock-solid. I'm not a fan-boy even though I like to use an optimised system and, yes it's cool to use something new and advanced. But in the end it is about what works. Especially if it's about preventing data-loss and a stable FS. That makes me choose Reiser4 over anything else. For me, it's both the fastest and most stable FS I have ever tried. YMMV, but I recommend everyone to take a serious look at it.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
asiobob
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 1375
Location: Bamboo Creek

PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

it's unfortunate that R4 is not as "stable" in other arches where as V3 and EXT3 happily work on them all. Perhaps this has been fixed and the last remaining issue for vanilla is in fact the VFS dupe angle...who knows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xordan
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ASIO_BOB wrote:
it's unfortunate that R4 is not as "stable" in other arches where as V3 and EXT3 happily work on them all. Perhaps this has been fixed and the last remaining issue for vanilla is in fact the VFS dupe angle...who knows.


Well I know there were problems on amd64 in the past, but those seem to be all fixed now. I don't know about other arches. I'm suprised that people still say it's horribly unstable, even in the amd64 technotes on the gentoo site it says: "DOESN'T WORK ON AMD64", even though lots of people, including myself, have been running on reiser4 without any problems at all for months. Maybe 6 months ago it wasn't working well, but people should try things out again after a period of time and not stick to what they know of in the past. I'd like to see reiser4 in the kernel, (gentoo-sources or vanilla), even if it's got "EXPERIMENTAL, WILL BLOW UP YOUR PC!" written next to it. :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jake
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 1132

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ASIO_BOB wrote:
it's unfortunate that R4 is not as "stable" in other arches where as V3 and EXT3 happily work on them all. Perhaps this has been fixed and the last remaining issue for vanilla is in fact the VFS dupe angle...who knows.

I've been bugging Namesys about PPC (which doesn't work at all right now), but it looks like they're spending all their time on the VFS stuff and cryptcompress.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Unsupported Software All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum