ext2 vs reiserfs

[Joshua Penix]

I haven't run either extensively (meaning on heavy-production machines), but
I've got a few desktops and light servers with each.

I've had absolutely no troubles with XFS, and the RedHat 7.1-XFS installer
ISO makes life really easy.

Once installed and running, I've had no troubles with Reiser either.
However, Reiser did *not* get along with some SAN hardware I was testing...
it absolutely refused to mount a partition I created.

XFS is the more mature of the two filesystems, having been around on IRIX
for years, but its integration into Linux is more recent than Reiser.

Here's a decent overview of a number of journaling FS's from Freshmeat
(includes Reiser and XFS): http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/212/


--Josh


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David J.Looney [mailto:dlooney at attglobal.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 7:32 AM
> To: kplug-list at kernel-panic.org
> Subject: Re: ext2 vs reiserfs
> 
> 
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:53:34 -0700
> Joshua Penix <jpenix at projectdesign.com> wrote:
> 
> > Neat stuff... I'll never run another Linux server without a 
> journaling FS...
> > I'd happily use XFS, Reiser or ext3 currently.  JFS is 
> looking good too...
> 
> Can anyone comment on running XFS vs Reiser ?