James Sutherland wrote:
> There is a difference between progress (better implementation) and changes
> to the actual structure. If the version of ReiserFS built into the 2.4
> series will not remain stable (backwards and forwards compatability, from
> 2.4.0 to 2.4.999, transparently), or it may not be properly maintained
> throughout that period, then it should remain external until 2.5.
The reiserfs developers are already willing (and also pushed by many users
and sponsors) to provide a sensible amount of forward- and backward-compatibility.
Inclusion in the main kernel tree would be just another reason to care
about that.
> Do not reinvent the wheel, even if your new wheel has better benchmark
> results. Improve/replace the existing one, by all means - just don't go
> adding new proprietary wheels to make your code a bit faster.
There is no "wheel" (that is, a good, standardized journaling API) yet -
so there's no "reinvenstion".
Also, performance _is_ an issue. We're running a number of mission critical
servers which hit their limits even using the fastest available SCSI harddisks,
and using reiserfs instead of ext2 bought us some very valuable time to
seek solutions.
But the most important point I want to make is that reiserfs is _by_far_
more mature and better supported than dozens of experimental features
that have been included in the kernel for ages.
Just think of funny things like the experimental "bridging" feature (which
never really got stable) and alike.
I think the fast progress reiserfs undergoes is a reason _for_, not against
inclusion. There are other features which cause much more problems
due to rapidly changing re-designs - such as the setup-methods for firewall
rules...
Regards,
Lutz Vieweg
-- Dipl. Phys. Lutz Vieweg | email: lkv@isg.de Innovative Software AG | Phone/Fax: +49-69-505030 -20/-50 Feuerbachstrasse 26-32 | http://www.isg.de/persons/lkv/ 60325 Frankfurt am Main | ^^^ PGP key available here ^^^
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:25 EST