Re: fsync vs open_sync

The world rejoiced as merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com ("Merlin Moncure") wrote:
> Ok, you were right. I made some tests and NTFS is just not very
> good in the general case. I've seen some benchmarks for Reiser4
> that are just amazing.

Reiser4 has been sounding real interesting.

The killer problem is thus:

"We must caution that just as Linux 2.6 is not yet as stable as
Linux 2.4, it will also be some substantial time before V4 is as
stable as V3."

In practice, there's a further problem.

We have some systems at work we need to connect to EMC disk arrays;
that's something that isn't supported by EMC unless you're using a
whole set of pieces that are "officially supported."

RHAT doesn't want to talk to you about support for anything other than
ext3.

I'm not sure what all SuSE supports; they're about the only other Linx
vendor that EMC would support, and I don't expect that Reiser4 yet
fits into the "supportable" category :-(.

The upshot of that is that this means that we'd only consider using
stuff like Reiser4 on "toy" systems, and, quite frankly, that means
that they'll have "toy" disk as opposed to the good stuff :-(.

And frankly, we're too busy with issues nearer to our hearts than
testing out ReiserFS. :-(
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "cbbrowne.com")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/emacs.html
"Linux! Guerrilla Unix Development Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus."
-- <mah(at)ka4ybr(dot)com> Mark A. Horton KA4YBR