From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-107859-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1NjDL9-0000a6-Kw
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:03:23 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 498D1E0969
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:03:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bw0-f219.google.com (mail-bw0-f219.google.com [209.85.218.219])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A04E085D
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:10:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so1151345bwz.26
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 06:10:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=jcPLvmRal+PObllvgq5J9+otjYbi6gRpW9yQWDu0xaI=;
b=SMBQJ7r5ZI45/CNWq0KdQsiE7+fcZARLdpB3fMC52AGinX1VAUrnSQwFuUWDJwfaLa
nAqFuOP2YhWS/o0Th0I3kczXR7C93nQmm26LjJTpNTlHFwBajcPur/m1Ivko+ZkijH4H
mIVge1F0zM8RFCLvsCBHjvdTE4crrS8YNumF4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type;
b=uzuh4votr6nfDCMzKtsfrCt+QxB0Jegf758VHH2P+iTPJP/unOI68KLKHyI9LlkN71
VcAw3ay4dp6Jakoqr1wLhNCKoeSOmQH0oLy2WnznFNrBy80r31cCFOrAy6yOTeoSQSTw
c2Kpqoud8NLQqgAbMVmSf1Ei24eLGv5c2BxgY=
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.15.140 with SMTP id k12mr2049859bka.63.1266761417330; Sun,
21 Feb 2010 06:10:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201002211503.40457.volkerarmin@googlemail.com>
References: <358eca8f1002210556x443d7e33h6e4305b653d2c81d@mail.gmail.com>
<201002211503.40457.volkerarmin@googlemail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:10:17 +0000
Message-ID: <358eca8f1002210610x38eb865avff144afec304db70@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] reiser4 Vs reiserfs for / on new Gentoo
isntallation
From: Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: ff71bb1b-3842-4ccd-ba67-6b8e1f37b32a
X-Archives-Hash: afc6be2513f5746b3246d43ca0c51135
On 21 February 2010 14:03, Volker Armin Hemmann
<volkerarmin@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sonntag 21 Februar 2010, Mick wrote:
>> I know that some of you have been using reiser4 for some years now.
>> How does it compare in performance and reliability in terms to
>> reiserfs and xfs?
>>
> they don't even come close in performance. XFS sucks with files who are not
> multi megabyte in size.
>
>> A few years ago I remember there were problems compiling or running
>> some applications/libraries on reiser4 - are these problems now over?
>> Any gotchas?
>
> a loooong time ago there was a bug when compiling kde and without compression.
> Fixed shortly afterwards, never had a problem again.
Thanks Volker for a prompt reply. Is reiser4 still being developed,
or is Linux now moving towards ext4?
Some googling has shown me that reiser4 gives better performance than
ext4, although not across the board.
--
Regards,
Mick