On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:39:29 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:20:39 -0400, Meat Plow wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:55:49 +0200, J.O. Aho wrote:
>>
>>> Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:25:28 -0400, Meat Plow wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Was there a reason you chose reiser over say ext3 when you were using
>>>>> F8?
>>>>
>>>> I have a 1T, four drive, software RAID5 that's been corrupted more
>>>> than once when I was running ext3 on it. Since I've moved to ReiserFS
>>>> I haven't had any corruption despite several massive rebuilds.
>>>>
>>>> ReiserFS seems to have more overhead but appears to be much more
>>>> robust than ext3.
>>>
>>> In most cases ReiserFS is much faster than ext3 and not too far behind
>>> jfs and xfs.
>>>
>>> Due the low quality on HP laptops, I have tried a number of different
>>> file systems, jfs and xfs did work so so, Reiser4 (rc1) was at least at
>>> the time too slow, ext3 did almost worse than Reiser4, only ReiserFS
>>> did recover without trouble and on a short time from the troubles
>>> caused by the hardware caused crashes.
>>
>> Well I'll agree that ext3 is a little slow but I would have no fear
>> pulling the plug on this pc and ruining the ext3 slice. It's happened
>> several times in the past during power fluctuations until I went out and
>> purchased a UPS for this pc and I've never had damage on a large scale.
>
> Was that a drive that multiple people write to at the same time?

No but there wasn't any mention of multiple users writing simultaneously
to the drive on J.O. Aho's crashing HP laptop.