Or will just build the mentioned support into Phoromatic, much cleaner, easier, and more efficient that way.
Originally Posted by chithanh
This is why I use Ext3 for /home and Ext4 for /
I don't need the extra speed when accessing my documents, but I need reliability. Likewise, I can take a hit on reliability, for a faster boot time.
Don't trust Ext4.
If you haven't yet overwritten the fs, you might want to take a look at these:
Unlike what many people think, it *is* possible to recover deleted and thought-lost files on ext2/3/4 filesystems.
Loosing data sucks. The other day I blew up a HDD due to a badly-designed cable that switched 5V with 12V, and more recently due to a crash and corruption in zfs-fuse. And, as I have learned, the great ZFS (TM) unlike other fs's, doesn't have *any* real option to try and recover files, because it is so great (TM) that problems just doesn't happen (or you should have used raid, because every normal user should run all of his systems on raid). But I digress...
And one more link from my ext recovery bookmark archive:
Originally Posted by [Knuckles]
Couldn't edit my previous post: the limit for editing is now 1 minute? Geez.
The cat ate my homework, heh. Blame ext4, that's the ticket.
Sad to hear all that work is gone. Well, at least you can file a bug report.
But: there is an ooold rule.
Do them on physically separate data carriers.
I learned that about 8 years ago during a HW failure. And I was happy that I had at least 50% of my data off that drive. I was in a backup process when it fubared
And: Don't use unfinished file systems. I keep away from any of the new ones, may they have performace better, I do not care. Data safety is much more important. One can use them when they're ready.
I just find it hilarious the see the many bugs and problems ext4 causes while it was announced to be the greatest since readily cut bread. Wasn't it iirc some of the devs of etx4 that were agains the Über-Filesystem reiser4 to go into kernel? And that's some years ago.
Hope you'll find the time to redo the benchmarks.
That's a pity!
One question: you're blaming ext4. How do you know it is not caused by some other unrelated bug?
that is what you get trusting extX devs declaring their stuff 'stable'.
ext4 should rot in the staging section of the kernel.
Originally Posted by Adarion
not only that - all that people who attacked and blocked reiser4 because of 'layer violations' don't have problems with btrfs that does the same but much, much worse.