On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 11:21:02AM -0500, Jean-Michel Smith wrote:
>
>First, I've had resier lose data on systems that were running fine, i.e. were 
>NOT shut down improperly, or suffered a kernel hang, or any other sort of 
>disruption that one could reasonably expect would lead to filesystem 
>corruption.

I've seen these types of corruptions as well. It's as if the writes aren't
synced to disk in a timely manner and therefor just don't take place. The
journaling in reiser is supposed to prevent this. I've also had low memory
issues with reiser, when doing large amounts of small block IO, it'll just
randomly corrupt pieces of data. I didn't test too much to ascertain the
cause of the effect, suffice it to say that it was enough to make me stay
away from it.

>Reiser comes nowhere near being as safe or stable as these alternatives (with 
>the possible exception of ext3 which I need to do more testing with).

Stephen Tweedie will freely admit that ext2 is kinda haphazzard in the way
it does certain things but relies HEAVILY on a very good fsck. Now
reiserfsck on the otherhand (and I can't back this up either) appears to
just through out inconsistent inodes rather than trying to repair them. 

All just heresy of course, i have absolutely 0 data to back any of this up,
but I for one wouldn't use reiser in production. 

-- 
Ben Lutgens				 | http://people.sistina.com/~blutgens/	
System Administrator	 | http://www.sistina.com/
Sistina Software Inc. | 

"I got a wife and kids too but you don't see me out here stealing Imperial
Droids now do ya?"