On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:30:20PM +0200, Clemens Eisserer spake thusly: > Another reason I moved away was btrfs corrupted, and btrfsck is still > not able to repair it. > I really like btrfs but in my opinion it has still a long road to go > and declaring it stable in 2.6.35 is quite optimistic at best. How many of reiserfs' problems were due to bugs in reiserfs vs due to buggy PC memory which is rarely ECC? These fancy new filesystems hold a lot of datastructures in memory compared to older filesystems which would seem to increase the chances that they could be broken by bad RAM. I am concerned that a flipped bit in memory somewhere could be written out to disk and hose the filesystem. I know ZFS implements a lot of checksums to prevent this sort of thing but it also tends to run on nicer hardware with ECC. I never had corruption problems with reiserfs even while running it on many terabytes of disk. I know plenty of people who constantly lost data to it. I can't explain the difference other than hardware. -- Tracy Reed http://tracyreed.org
Attachment:
pgp5ivK4Jp5HS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
