Jump to content

Why ReiserFS?

NAS

By NAS
in Lounge

Recommended Posts

NAS Experienced

NAS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Actually to be strictly correct Tom cited the reason he chose circa 2005-2006 which is not necessarily the same as had the decision been made today.

 

This debate is definitely no where near a conclusion.

 

Since the political side of this debate is still going on I will comment on it. I am not comfortable using the work of Hans Reiser. Whilst others may find it fine I do not and would welcome a means to opt out of this requirement.

 

I would also request that since i started this thread we no longer refer to genocidal dictators or other terrible organisations; i do not want, and I am sure Limetech does not want google listings for his domain and these search words. Please just discuss the principles without referencing these people. I am sure no particular malice is mean but quite simply i take offence to it. Neutral, relevant on topic technical debate only please.

Link to comment
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply
SSD Mentor

SSD

Posted
Posted
Several of the key developers of Reiser FS have suggested a name change for the project

 

How about felonfs?    ;)  Seriously, I think renaming the FS would be a smart move.  Or better yet introducing a new FS that just happens to be backward compatible with reiserfs.

 

I am not comfortable using the work of Hans Reiser. Whilst others may find it fine I do not and would welcome a means to opt out of this requirement.

 

Is someone trying to use this issue to guilt a certain developer into doing a certain enhancement that they would like to see for other reasons?  :o  (Sorry, couldn't resist.  No offense intended).

Link to comment
NAS Experienced

NAS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

LOL I can see why you would say that but its not true. Im one guy, one opinion, if i get ruled down then so be it but Im going to say my piece until i am :)

 

Don't get me wrong I am not some bleading heart; I just try to act on the internet and treat people the same as in real life. This is going way OT now but IMO the main problem with the internet is that society's normal interaction rules break down as people are seen as "virtual". Put it this way i wouldnt walk in a room with and start talking about the the k times 3. Im sure some people would but for me I wouldnt. ANyways moving on...

 

 

Getting back OT we should weigh up the pros and cons again and then come to a conclusion. If the resierfs wins again then so be it I will say no more but the debate should happen.

 

On the pro side of ext3 am i correct in saying it is the most technically advanced cross platform compliant fs? I realise windows support will always be problematic for everything except windows partition types but fat, fat32 and ntfs and not viable as we know.

 

One area unRAID could be stronger is the types of partition that can be plugged in and read for data transfer. Also one you think that a major selling point is individually useable array disks its not a long leap to realise that users will likely want the ability to move disks around systems.

Link to comment
NLS Community Regular

NLS

Posted
Posted

Different people. :)

 

Even in real life, I wouldn't have a problem using something that is GOOD, because the person who created is bad.

 

(in fact society also does the exact opposite that is much worse: uses something bad, even though the person who created it is good)

 

In any case, if its going to Ethics, I still don't get it. I create the Elixir of Youth and then go and rape 20 women. I'd sure deserve do die, but this makes the Elixir any worse? Nope. Don't I deserve the money I'd get (or my family) for selling it? Hell, yeah! Would you not buy it? (and let's not expand this in a discussion concerning if you'd buy an Elixir of Youth anyway)

 

Sorry just don't get it. Different people I guess.

 

Von Porsche AFAIK was a close friend of Hitler. Maybe we shouldn't ever buy anything Volkswagen, Porsche (even key rings) etc.?

 

Back to the (main) topic, an evaluation of switching to a new filesystem (or allowing one or more extra than RFS) would also include the question "is it worth the troube?" for the developer. Let's not forget this.

 

 

Link to comment
NAS Experienced

NAS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think i am also right in saying that ext3 is on almost every distro whereas resierfs isnt. That goes on the the + camp.

 

Is it worth it... no idea. I suppose that comes down to how much work would it be.

Link to comment
SSD Mentor

SSD

Posted
Posted

Interesting topic.  There are basically three intertwined discussions occurring -

 

1.  About the desire (by some at least) to allow non RFS filesystems to be used within an unRAID array on the basis of technical reasons;

2.  About the moral issue of continuing to use RFS in light of the fact that the primary author (and namesake) for the FS murdered his estranged wife; and

3.  About the larger moral issue of using a product attributed to a really really bad person or organization IF it is a good product.

 

Here are my thoughts ..

 

1.  RFS was a good choice for FS 2-3 years ago, and by all accounts, still does a good job at the task.  The reasons sited for a change (excepting the moral one) all involve uses of unRAID that are outside its use as a file server appliance.  I think options are good, and if this would make unRAID a more popular platform to Tom's current and perspective buyers, that Tom should consider it.  But IMHO there are higher priority enhancements that should be made first.

 

2.  I am not supportive of providing monetary benefit to convicted felons.  Normally any monetary income is paid as compensatory damages to the victim.  (I don't think RFS generates any income per se, except perhaps the part that provides technical support).  But its continued success would benefit the author in non-monetary ways - by providing a source of pride and, in a way, acceptance from the Linux/technical community.  An endorsement for wife-a-cide?  Maybe not, but certainly not a condemnation either.  Given this perspective, I tend to agree with NASuser (maybe a first! ;)) and I would prefer to NOT contribute to Reiser's self worth.  But a decision to abandon a public domain OS feature immediately does not seem waranted here.  I think that we'll see steps to distance Linux and the FS from the original author, and derivative works unrelated to Reiser will provide a seamless path for users like us.  I think we need to give this a little time and let nature take its course.  I think we'll find that Reiser's name will quickly be dropped (already being considered) and his namesake fall into obscurity.

 

3.  This is by far the most interesting topic.  In general I think that the market is very prudish and that the NAME on the package is VERY important.  If it came to light tomorrow that the elder Mr. Ford had been a child mollester (THIS IS NOT THE CASE, JUST AN EXAMPLE), I think that you'd find that Ford Motor Company would be hugely damaged and likely go out of business.  At the very least, it would undergo a name change.  Anyone driving a Ford car would suddenly be ashamed and want the Ford name removed, if not the entire car replaced.  It isn't that the car is any different.  Mr. Ford has been dead of a long time and was in no way associated with THAT car.  Why would society demand a pound of flesh from Ford Motor Company?  Maybe a psychologist could explain this, but regardless of the reason, I think it is true.  What if the same happend to the founder of GM?  What if it were the elder Mr. Edison?  Would we all stop using light bulbs?  What if they were called edison bulbs?  Kind of interesting ...

 

Now if a felon invented some life saving treatment - like created a functional artificial heart or an elixir of life, that person may find himself "redeemed" in the public eye - and the product viewed as "repentance" or giving back to society.  That person might find himself pardoned (maybe) and his name held is high regard for doing something far better for humanity than whatever damage he did through his crime, especially if he was repentant and humble.  This is a very theoretical area, as no good examples come to mind.  But I do NOT think that people would flush the elixir down the toilet, and most would find a moral perspective (excuse?) to support its purchase and use.  Looking out for #1 trumps moral arguments for most of us.  More likely, however, would be that the lifesaving product would come to market in another form and bear no discernable connection to its felonious creator.

Link to comment
WeeboTech Veteran

WeeboTech

Posted
Posted

Interesting topic.  There are basically three intertwined discussions occurring -

The core question/discussion is "why reiserfs" Which was answered by Tom.

Is it still worth discussing the continued use of reiserfs based on a moral compass?

 

1.  About the desire (by some at least) to allow non RFS filesystems to be used within an unRAID array on the basis of technical reasons;

I guess next real questions are, Will it continue top be the core fs?, will others be offered? and if so which and when?

 

 

2.  About the moral issue of continuing to use RFS in light of the fact that the primary author (and namesake) for the FS murdered his estranged wife; and

3.  About the larger moral issue of using a product attributed to a really really bad person or organization IF it is a good product.

 

I feel like I opened a can of worms here.

Our moral compass should not detract from the use of a technical invention.

The reason I mentioned it is based entirely on the future of the project.

 

  But IMHO there are higher priority enhancements that should be made first.

and this begs for another thread such as "What is the future Roadmap of unRAID?"

 

 

Perhaps a POLL thread should be created to see what the users feel would be appropriate for filesystem support.

 

ReiserFS

EXT3

XFS

 

What are the PROS/CONS of each?

 

What other fs does linux support that should or could be a base FS of choice in today's world?

 

Is NTFS sufficient to use as a read/write environment or is it only worth having for capturing and transferring data?

Link to comment
NAS Experienced

NAS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

continuing straight on from this...

 

is NTFS even potentially viable?. I assumed not but if it is we should absolutely explore this as it may attract a load of windows users and go head to head with the appalling WHS.

Link to comment
Joe L. Grand Master

Joe L.

Posted
Posted

continuing straight on from this...

 

is NTFS even potentially viable?. I assumed not but if it is we should absolutely explore this as it may attract a load of windows users and go head to head with the appalling WHS.

NTFS is absolutely viable. 

 

In fact, it probably needs to be one of the very first to be added as an alternative file system to reiserFS.  It was not back in 2005, but a stable release have been available since 2007.

The ntfs-3g under Linux works really well.  Check out this item in the wiki for details: http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Mounting_an_external_USB_drive_having_an_existing_NTFS_file_system_in_READ/WRITE_mode_to_transport_files_from/to_unRaid_server

 

Some interesting thoughts here: http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=8647 It covers many of the topics in this thread...

 

Joe L.

Link to comment
NAS Experienced

NAS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

...then RFS would be the standard FS of many distros - which is not the case.

 

To be fair it is the standard of quite a few of the big enterprise Linux distruntions but according to that link Joe L (superman reference hmm) it seems even the big players are starting to move away.

 

ReiserFS is great but from what I am reading even before the loss of the main developer they were in bug and security fix only mode.

 

I am quite excited by this NTFS idea: I can really see it being a big advantage to many non hardcore users and a tiny slice of the WHS pie is still HUGE. With NTFS users could try a linux based NAS and still go back if they dont like it. Im sure most wouldnt go back but having the abilty to do so would presumably allow alot more "suck it and see" users.

Link to comment
WeeboTech Veteran

WeeboTech

Posted
Posted

In defense of you people that vote for change, I can say that if RFS was better than ext2/3, then RFS would be the standard FS of many distros - which is not the case.

 

I'm going to disagree with that point and use the VHS vs Betamax argument.

In addition I can throw in the ZIP100 vs the LS120... it was always my thought the LS120 technology was better because it could support standard floppies and the 120MB media. ZIP100 made it to market first hence won..

 

At the time of unRAID's unveiling, I think reiserfs was the smart choice (for the reasons that Tom mention). There is no dispute there. Question posed, question answered with valid points and agreement on such points.

I don't see it being totally replaced, but possibly supplemented by needs/requirements of others.

I do notice that it does perform better in certain aspects, so I'm not an advocate of elimination UNLESS there will be no further support or a truly better FS becomes the standard. 

Reading up on ZFS shows it has allot of promise, just the licensing issues have to be agreed upon.

 

Link to comment
NLS Community Regular

NLS

Posted
Posted

That would be an interesting rename. :)

 

BTW Weebo, all my (I mean ALL) my LS120 floppies died sooner or later (usually "sooner").

I was a fan ("forced" in fact as the company I was working back then had quite a few such drives - standard on some Compaq at the time), but the fact is a fact.

 

I also hate Zip technology and never got why it survived and evolved.

 

ALSO I hate tape drives. Normal DAT and (ultra expensive for some unknown reason) DLT were never a trusted backup media (and for a reason as I have quite a few terror stories).

 

So what this makes me? :D

 

 

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
Billped Enthusiast

Billped

Posted
Posted

wow..

How does revealing the body of his murdered wife give way to a lighter sentence. Something is wrong with out justice system if this works out that way!

 

It provides closure for the family - a worthwhile trade, IMO.

 

 

Bill

Link to comment
parsec Contributor

parsec

Posted
Posted

Agree on the value of trade.

Sidestory: ive lived in a cold climate, where a few minutes in the water would kill you. Lifewests were used when sailing/fishing, to provide a body for the family to bury.

Closure is important !

/Rene

 

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...