Re: reiser4 plugins

[Alan Cox]

On Gwe, 2005-06-24 at 20:21, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Alan, this is FUD.   Our V3 fsck was written after everything else was,
> for lack of staffing reasons (why write an fsck before you have an FS
> worth using).  As a result, there was a long period where the fsck code
> was unstable.  It is reliable now. 
> 
> People often think that our tree makes fsck less robust.  Actually fsck
> can throw the entire internal tree away and rebuild from leaf nodes, and
> frankly that makes things pretty robust. 

I did a series of tests well after resier3 had fsck that consisted of
modelling the behaviour of systems under error state. I modelled random
bit errors, bit errors at a fixed offset (class ram failure), sector 4
byte slip (known IDE fail case) and sectors going away.

Reiserfs didn't handle it anything like as gracefully as ext2. Its a
pretty easy experiment to write the code for and the results are
interesting.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/