ext2fs

[Gustavo Castro Puig]

Will:

	I'm currently using ReiserFS Version 3.5.23 in our primary DNS
since some months ago, and it's working fine.
The benefits are: more speed, security and short failure recovery time.
On the other hand, reiserfs in kernel 2.4 (until 2.4.7) have some problems
with chipsets VIA, but if you upgrade it, the trouble dissapear.
Personally, in my own server I have a kernel 2.4.4 running in a VIA
motherboard, and I,ve never seen any troubles, but I know the trouble
exists because some partners had it with their own servers. May be a
matter of luck...
The reiserfsck is faster because the journaling, but this takes almost 30
Mb. in a 20 Gb. filesystem for it (it doesn't matter if disk space is not
your problem...).
	I recommend it.

Saludos,
	Gustavo Castro Puig.
	Administrador de red - Network Administrator.
	E-Mail:gcastro at ifxnw.com.uy  ICQ:126398056 AIM:gcastrop2001
	2001 - IFX Networks - MULTIRED
	Mercedes 1398 esq. Germán Barbato
	Tel. (598-2) 908 29 30 // Fax. (598-2) 900 03 14
	http://www.ifxnetworks.com
	Montevideo - Uruguay

On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Will Yardley wrote:

>
> just a question; has anyone running bind9 on linux tried other
> filesystems than ext2fs ?  one of our nameservers was taking a really
> long time to fsck; we're pretty sure it's because of all the small zone
> files.  even though the entire /var/named directory is only 60MB it was
> taking an hour or two to fsck the machine (now that we've switched named
> to a more stable machine and removed /var/named it only takes about 12 -
> 15 minutes to fsck.
>
> anyone used reiserfs or anything else with good success? does this have
> any problems or additional benefits?
>
> w
>
> --
> GPG Public Key:
> http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/
>