Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion

On Mon, 2006-07-31 12:17:12 -0700, Clay Barnes <clay.barnes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 20:43 Mon 31 Jul , Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-31 20:11:20 +0200, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@xxxxxx> wrote:
Jan-Benedict Glaw schrieb am 2006-07-31:
[Crippled DMA writes]
Massive hardware problems don't count. ext2/ext3 doesn't look much better in
such cases. I had a machine with RAM gone bad (no ECC - I wonder what

They do! Very much, actually. These happen In Real Life, so I have to

I think what he meant was that it is unfair to blame reiser3 for data
loss in a massive failure situation as a case example by itself. What

Crippling a few KB of metadata in the ext{2,3} case probably wouldn't
fobar the filesystem...

failure robustness counts... " This of course assumes you actually had
the *exact* same problem with hardware under ext3, pretty much in every
detail. Of course, so many subtleties interact in massive ways with

The point is that it's quite hard to really *** up ext{2,3} with only
some KB being written while it seems (due to the
fragile^Wsophisticated on-disk data structures) that it's just easy to
kill a reiser3 filesystem.

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@xxxxxxxxxx +49-172-7608481
Signature of: Zensur im Internet? Nein danke!
the second :

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature