4 ms·

I don't think this is new to 3.18. I have had a lockup issue in every version since 3.2 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29162 https://bugzilla.kern

by dkhenry 12y ago

I don't think this is new to 3.18. I have had a lockup issue in every version since 3.2 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29162 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29162

0x0 12y ago
That looks like a reiserfs bug. Is there any reason to go with reiserfs these days instead of ext4, xfs, btrfs?
- dkhenry 12y ago
  no I after dealing with it I would recommend avoiding it like the plague. However with several petabytes deployed at remote sites its not a simple matter to up and abandon it.
- lmm 12y ago
  Versus ext4: online resize, better at handling large directories. Versus xfs: better at handling power loss/crashes (no "trailing zeroes problem"), reiserfsck is not 100% reliable but it can sometimes save you whereas if you reach the same situation with xfs then you have 0% chance of recovering your data. Versus btrfs: more mature (isn't btrfs still tagged as experimental?), same situation wrt fsck. I use ZFS where I can, but for root filesystems on linux machines reiser still seems like the best tradeoff.
  - 0x0 12y ago
    Ext4 seems to support online growing resize (although needs offline to shrink). Didn't ext3 or ext4 also add directory hashing?
  - feld 12y ago
    reiserfsck used to be a game of russian roulette -- it either sort-of works and you can mount your filesystem, or it eats all your data. I can't say I'd trust my data on it these days.
    - lmm 12y ago
      It's a gamble sure. But if you get into the same situation with XFS or btrfs there's no gamble, just guaranteed data loss.
      - feld 12y ago
        XFS is not as bad as it once was, but I don't use either of those anyway.
  - kasabali 12y ago
    > Versus xfs: better at handling power loss/crashes (no "trailing zeroes problem") I heard they fixed it in 2012. Actually there have been a lot of developments in XFS since 2011, I'm not really interested in filesystems but you should have a look at it again if you're interested.
bato 12y ago
Confirming we also saw a lot of lockup issues since 3.12 (with both ext4 and btrfs).

by dkhenry 12y ago

I don't think this is new to 3.18. I have had a lockup issue in every version since 3.2 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29162 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29162

0x0 12y ago

That looks like a reiserfs bug. Is there any reason to go with reiserfs these days instead of ext4, xfs, btrfs?

dkhenry 12y ago
no I after dealing with it I would recommend avoiding it like the plague. However with several petabytes deployed at remote sites its not a simple matter to up and abandon it.
lmm 12y ago
Versus ext4: online resize, better at handling large directories. Versus xfs: better at handling power loss/crashes (no "trailing zeroes problem"), reiserfsck is not 100% reliable but it can sometimes save you whereas if you reach the same situation with xfs then you have 0% chance of recovering your data. Versus btrfs: more mature (isn't btrfs still tagged as experimental?), same situation wrt fsck. I use ZFS where I can, but for root filesystems on linux machines reiser still seems like the best tradeoff.
- 0x0 12y ago
  Ext4 seems to support online growing resize (although needs offline to shrink). Didn't ext3 or ext4 also add directory hashing?
- feld 12y ago
  reiserfsck used to be a game of russian roulette -- it either sort-of works and you can mount your filesystem, or it eats all your data. I can't say I'd trust my data on it these days.
  - lmm 12y ago
    It's a gamble sure. But if you get into the same situation with XFS or btrfs there's no gamble, just guaranteed data loss.
    - feld 12y ago
      XFS is not as bad as it once was, but I don't use either of those anyway.
- kasabali 12y ago
  > Versus xfs: better at handling power loss/crashes (no "trailing zeroes problem") I heard they fixed it in 2012. Actually there have been a lot of developments in XFS since 2011, I'm not really interested in filesystems but you should have a look at it again if you're interested.

bato 12y ago

Confirming we also saw a lot of lockup issues since 3.12 (with both ext4 and btrfs).