[Techtalk] Is Linux 2.4.18 Really That Unstable?

[Malcolm Tredinnick]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 09:40:40AM -0500, Julie wrote:
> Katie Bechtold wrote:
> > 
> > A couple of months ago one of my local LUG members recounted a very
> > bad experience with using a 2.4.18 kernel on a laptop equipped with
> > external Firewire 80 GB Maxtor Firewire disks with the new ext3
> > journaling file system.  If you're using Firewire, it sounds like
> > that combination may be the problem.
> 
> It's starting to sound more like ext3.  Which is really a bummer
> because I like the journalling.  It was taking forever to run
> fsck on 240GB back when I was running ext2 ...

Hard to say from the evidence given on this list so far. In the
case-study I gave earlier on in the thread, I forgot to mention that
_all_ of our production machines and almost all of our desktop machines
use ext3 for their filesystsm and we have never had a problem with it
(and it's saved our bacon more than once).

Claims that ext3 is not a mature are just not well-founded. It has been
in production use by a lot of people for a couple of years now. Places
like www.rpmfind.net have been running it since it was a patch for 2.2
kernels and that site (and its mirrors) gets enormous amounts of load.
It's a fairly simple filesystem, layered on top of a well-understood and
tested filesystem (ext2).

Malcolm

-- 
Two wrongs are only the beginning.