What does it matter if my FS is "robust" if I can't use the box for minutes at a time because I'm doing something disk-intensive... Is the answer jump to a new distribution? Not always. There's other...issues...that are not unlike this one with Ubuntu in Fedora, Mandriva, etc... Every one of them make dumb decisions from time to time.
Ext4 MIGHT be okay, but unfortunately, you can't boot with it right at the moment- however, it may have the same glitch that Ext3 currently has. XFS and JFS don't do anything other than metadata journalling, but in and of itself with a UPS, you should mostly be fine with them- and you CAN boot with either of those or Reiserfs (though we know what gives with this...I probably need to move to XFS or JFS on my home dir here at work...). Btrfs is in development and is expected to be mostly ready for prime-time in 6 or so months. There's issues with it that are currently unresolved (as in not fully implemented yet...) so I wouldn't use it for anything important. ZFS is available as a fuse filesystem and could be a choice for some things.I had been playing with the idea of converting my partitions to XFS, but as you point out, it doesn't implement a full journal, which kind of concerns me... However, AFAIK is the preferred FS for media content-creation as it has unsurpassed I/O performance with especially big files (movie raw data files?). I wish Sun did allow for a more flexible license on their ZFS (they know that by itself it is a GREAT asset ), and have been off the loop in the recent developments of other "better" FSes, so I don't know "what's out there". I know Ext4 debuted in one of the 2.6.2x kernels, but I do not know what exactly does have over Ext3, or its performance, etc. For the time being, I'm happy with what I've got, though.