Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reiser4 Brought To The Linux 5.0 Kernel

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Reiser4 Brought To The Linux 5.0 Kernel

    Phoronix: Reiser4 Brought To The Linux 5.0 Kernel

    For those still using the out-of-tree Reiser4 file-system, it may be about time to consider alternatives like Btrfs, XFS, ZFS On Linux, F2FS, or even the likes of Stratis and Bcachefs. But should you still be using this once promising file-system, the out-of-tree patches have been revised to now work with the Linux 5.0 kernel...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...inux-5.0-Patch

  • #2
    Can they at least rename it if they are going to continue to pointlessly work on it?

    Comment


    • #3
      What would be a good replacement for EXT4 on a PC with pretty simple use cases (browser, gaming, dev)? Or maybe EXT4 is still perfect for this usage?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Creak View Post
        What would be a good replacement for EXT4 on a PC with pretty simple use cases (browser, gaming, dev)? Or maybe EXT4 is still perfect for this usage?
        EXT4 is indeed perfect for anyone with no particular needs. When you don't know if it needs replacing and obviously don't have any complaints then you're still good.

        ReiserFS once was hot and trendy, but this was during a time when many of us were still using EXT2 on spinning hard disks. Back then did it make sense for some to give it a go, because it offered some speed ups.

        Now with SSDs everywhere and EXT having evolved are you still good. You can try looking into F2FS as it promises to support SSDs in particular, but you'll have to watch out, because not every distro will support F2FS from the start and will require extra work for you to be able to boot from it for example. Yet is the performance difference between EXT4 and F2FS rather negligible to the point where you may not really want to bother with the extra work. But if you're really thinking of replacing it then F2FS is something you want to look at.

        Of course when you're still using spinning hard disks then get rid of those first.
        Last edited by sdack; 04-13-2019, 11:53 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by labyrinth153 View Post
          Can they at least rename it if they are going to continue to pointlessly work on it?
          If it hasn't happened yet...
          The same thing goes for Linux kernel integration. From what I can tell by reading their wiki, they have no interest in doing that as they would rather stay out of tree at this point.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by labyrinth153 View Post
            Can they at least rename it if they are going to continue to pointlessly work on it?
            Why? What's wrong with keeping the historical name.

            It's not offensive or anything.

            Comment


            • #7
              It’s stupidly offensive. You said that knowing that it was.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by labyrinth153 View Post
                It’s stupidly offensive. You said that knowing that it was.
                Please recalibrate your sarcasm detector.

                Comment


                • #9
                  It is not just the name st issue with mainline inclusion. They didn't want to put in the work required to get it past review. It never made it past first review even before the murder trial.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by sdack View Post
                    but you'll have to watch out, because not every distro will support F2FS from the start and will require extra work for you to be able to boot from it
                    I've used F2FS on a USB stick about 2 years ago on Arch, and the only trouble I had was having to have a boot partition with a different file system (in my case it was EXT4 without a journal). With upcoming GNU GRUB 2.04 the problem should completely go away, so it never was that bad to begin with. I haven't used it on actual SSDs, and I hope it doesn't have awfully long GC times like I ran into back in the day. The stick I used was nasty in general, it was supposed to be a speedy USB 3.0 stick, but it was possibly the slowest one I've ever had, it could've been one of those with a tiny cache with acceptable performance and a crappy flash chip for storage. It's the first one I actually managed to kill with write cycles, but I assume it's mostly because it was crap. Right now an enclosure and a cheapo SSD would be WAY better, especially with actual TRIM support.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X