Reiser4 Brought To The Linux 5.0 Kernel

[torsionbar28]

Reiser was framed, probably by those nefarious Btrfs developers. #FreeHans

[profoundWHALE]

What you have missed here is that it's certain configurations of btrfs that is marked as unstable (especially raid 5/6), for other uses such as raid1,0 and 1+0 it has been stable for years now.

Tell that to my 16TB of unscrubbable, unfixable, unfsck-able RAID10 btrfs formatted drive pool.

I had to find some drives laying around to cp from the 16TB and found that I lost hundreds of gigabytes of data.

I saved my butt by keeping a separate backup of critical data.

I could have lost wedding videos, including my own, -forever- and people like you keep pushing crap like btrfs.

[andyprough]

@profoundWHALE - Tell that to my 16TB of unscrubbable, unfixable, unfsck-able RAID10 btrfs formatted drive pool.

I had to find some drives laying around to cp from the 16TB and found that I lost hundreds of gigabytes of data.

Back up your data! How many billion times do people have to be told that raid and btrfs are not substitutes for doing your backups?

[F.Ultra]

Tell that to my 16TB of unscrubbable, unfixable, unfsck-able RAID10 btrfs formatted drive pool.

I had to find some drives laying around to cp from the 16TB and found that I lost hundreds of gigabytes of data.

I saved my butt by keeping a separate backup of critical data.

I could have lost wedding videos, including my own, -forever- and people like you keep pushing crap like btrfs.

If you think that similar things have never happened on ext4, xfs or reiserfs then my cat have a bridge to sell you. If it's anecdotes you want then I can tell you that I have plenty of storage servers at work with 110T volumes (24x9.1TiB drives in btrfs raid1 on each server) running on btrfs without any problems.

[petterk]

If you think that similar things have never happened on ext4, xfs or reiserfs then my cat have a bridge to sell you. If it's anecdotes you want then I can tell you that I have plenty of storage servers at work with 110T volumes (24x9.1TiB drives in btrfs raid1 on each server) running on btrfs without any problems.

Well, that kind of defeats the purpose of the argument that is used by some comments here in that mainlined filesystems is more stable than the ones which are not in the kernel.

With that said - this is almost exclusively a BTRFS-issue what profoundWHALE is describing as it happens to *A LOT* more people using btrfs, than for example ESPECIALLY ext4, JFS and even reiserfs, not to mention (because of it's design through inline checksumming and atomic operations) - Reiser4.

[petterk]

Back up your data! How many billion times do people have to be told that raid and btrfs are not substitutes for doing your backups?

...meanwhile it is rarely nescessary to do backups of data being on Reiser4 filesystems because of the nature of the filesystem. Mirror/failover-subvolumes (replicas - raid1 is not), inline checksumming (sort of like the checksumming done by XFS), atomic operations, allocate on flush and a great fsck-utility. Btrfs even claims some of it's built in raid-features are STABLE - yet they have admitted the fact that using madm + btrfs for raid (in almost every scenario) is going to cause some sort of issues. That is a unique and critical design mistake. Not once have I ever heard of a filesystem not being able to support mdadm or even in some cases lvm.

[petterk]

I just want to add to this that ext4, which everyone think of as a modern filesystem, does not even have feature parity in 2019 with XFS which was designed in 1993 - go figure.

I also think it is really sad that reiserfs4 has not received the consideration it deserves. (On pure technical merit)

Also nobody seems to think that it is a big deal that ZFS performance drops like a rock when it gets past 80% space utilization.
I have a lot of respect for ZFS and used it a lot; both with ZOL and zfs-fuse back then. It is rock solid, but this 80% limit problem has been a thorn in my side for years.

I totally agree with your arguments on both ext4 - it's foundation is by far modern and carries over (imo) way to many elements from its older predecessor ext3, but it is a somewhat safe choice given the different journaling-methods it provides, making it atleast very much possible to avoid loss of data or corruption. ZFS is a great file system for some situations, like it's integrity focus which has been there from the start of the development as well as (at least for the operating systems it originally was meant for) native encryption, subvolumes (I believe the first of it's kind to provide such a thing), "self-healing" algorithms for preventing bit-rot and corruption but also it's various features which are quite similar to what reiser4 also has added through the years of development like transparent compression, mirror/failover support and so on. However, it is far from optimal for an average desktop user - it uses surprisingly much memory (you can limit it - with a penalty in performance), fixed 4k block allocation which is the most common in almost every FS I can think of right now, Reiser4 being one I know which does not require it and therefore stores data more efficiently. But yeah. It's not, in any kind, a revolution in filesystems. A great alternative being even older, is JFS. A properly optimized JFS partition is very snappy and responsive, some claim lower CPU usage as well, and is one of the more mature file systems noone seems to care about any more. Besides reiser4, ZFS (because memory nor disk usage is a concern for me atm) or JFS (yeah) would be my choice on SSDs (not very optimal for HDDs because of the high level of fragmentations it often produces).

[andyprough]

...meanwhile it is rarely nescessary to do backups of data being on Reiser4 filesystems because ....

Because, apparently Reiser4 users are idiots? There is no technical substitute for backups. And no excuse for not backing up. Reiser4 will not have any solution for you in the case of catastrophic hardware failure, flooding, fire, or massive electrical surge. Thinking you are safe because "Mirror/failover-subvolumes" is just sheer foolishness.

[tuxd3v]

yes, because of shitheads like you that don't bring anything useful but attacks projetcs like systemd, projects using systemd capabilities instead write every single shit at their own and demand the world is turning around them - the world don't, nobody cares about you, suck it

I think you described exactly a shitheads called hreindl, attacking always the SysVinit guys out there, only because they continue to use what they feel its the default for them..
But you want them to choose what pleases you.

Your little systemd world around you, and you demand that the world should turn around you and around it?!
The world doesn't care, nobody cares about you, suck it..

You are one of the Entitled by "toxic people" that arrived from Sauvage Capitalism , always attacking people, out there, with your greedy ideas, and disrespect!
Its because of people like you that very respectful people have leaved the community..

[tuxd3v]

no, i couldn't care less if you use sysvinit or your self written init script, as long as you shut up instead demand from others that you should be active supported and other should do more work to make everything work with your outdated shit

In first place that's a Lie!
Second, respect is when you develop something, but let others use what they already have and want to use..
Standardize something, that could be mutually used, by other projects, and defend plural options...that is respect!

Your ideas,responses, and attacks, always disrespecting someone, says otherwise!

problem is that my world is bigger than yours
i can handle it, you can't :-)

No, the problem is that you are a Bully troll.
That's the problem!
A person without self-respect, and without respect for others around..

When someone whants to use what they please( but you dislike ), you rapidly calls them "shitheads", "morons","Unprofessional's", and the list goes on and on..

Only because your little childish world, can't support people using their standard tools, tools that you don't want the world to use..
You need to grow up, control your ego, then maybe embrace the OpenSource world, with more respect( my opinion is that you would never embrace it like you should, because your base is already bad.. )..

I am saying this, because this world, needs to become again less toxic..

I still remember the good old days,
Where education, was the first thing to start doing something in this world..

Too much sauvage capitalism, greed, come to linux, has it started to boom.
I think that a "starting filter" would, be Education..