Reiserfs vs ext3

Steven Boothe steven at
Tue Mar 22 16:50:41 UTC 2005

Jason Straight wrote:
> On Monday 21 March 2005 16:57, n6 wrote:
>>My general experence is:
>>ReiserFS is very fast, but EXT3 is more stable, if your machine gets
>>power off, with ReiserFS in mt experence  your gona have issues. but
>>thats just my experiences.
> Yeah, I agree. And with reiser fs corruption doesn't make much sense, usually 
> it's just the open rw files that get hosed. But I've seen reiser mix up 
> things like rc.local and for postfix even when the machine didn't go 
> down.

Just out of curiousity, which version of ReiserFS are we talking about?

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list