xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs and reiserfs

To: Mark Hounschell <markh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfs and reiserfs
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:46:17 +0100
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Florin Andrei <florin@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3A6C935A.1F42640E@xxxxxxxxxx>; from markh@xxxxxxxxxx on Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:08:58PM -0500
References: <3A6C653C.B1983FE7@xxxxxxx> <3A6C7E32.F5854394@xxxxxxxxxx> <20010122202626.A12689@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3A6C935A.1F42640E@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 01:38:43PM -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote:
> > It's really offtopic, but I have to correct obviously wrong statements.
> > 
> > >   While I'm here does anyone know anything about the 2 problems I
> > > descibed above.
> > >
> > > 1. No LFS support in reiser  ( I know this ain't a reiser list. Sorry)
> > 
> > The reiserfs 3.6 that got merged into 2.4 supports files >2GB when you
> > let it convert the disk to a new disk format (this implies that 2.2
> > reiserfs cannot read it anymore)
> 
> I realize reiser 3.(something) will be in 2.4.1 kernel. It's not in the
> 2.4.0 that I just got. The reiser patch I used was 3.6.25. It
> was the latest they had on thier site. What do you mean "convert the
> disk
> to a new format" I have been reading (reiser list archives) and my
> problem
> with reiser almost seems to be a gcc revision problem. The Doc/Changes

There are no known reiserfs/gcc bugs (at least not known to me)


> in
> the src tree implies not to use 2.95.2 but to use 2.91.rr so I went back
> to that revision for kernel compile. My dist is SuSE 6.4 + updates.
> Maybe
> I should go back to 2.95.2 from SuSE? I've also read the XFS doesn't
> like
> 2.95.2 so maybe the answer to the original posters question, is that the


2.95.SuSE-7.0/6.4 doesn't generate a working XFS for me.

> two filesystems cannot coexsist at this time and function properly. I'll
> have to try 2.95.2 gcc when I get home and see if it matters. Back to 
> "convert the disk to a new format", what do you mean. Maybe I just left
> out a step???

When the disk was created using reiser 3.5 on 2.2. The 3.6 reiserfs
will read/write it, but not support files >2GB. When you mount it with 
the "conv" option it'll convert the disk to 3.6 format and support big files,
but you cannot go back to 2.2 anymore.

I see no reason why reiserfs and xfs shouldn't work in the same kernel,
except that it may OOM a bit faster because lots of memory can be pinned by
both. 


-Andi


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>