Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Borax Man Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Date: Sun, 4 May 2025 13:38:22 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 79 Message-ID: References: <364QP.125792$oJg.4439@fx17.iad> <0OSQP.28898$AoB5.17918@fx09.iad> Injection-Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 15:38:23 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="61e26986d27a70d5df4ab3a5cf9e9bec"; logging-data="2192322"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18akKfWTKtviVE5RjkTSOvM6+yizkIEFw4=" User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:RGwWHuTmubQh8tLWQbqsSeg31EI= Bytes: 6038 On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage wrote: > On 2025-05-04 05:51, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> On 2025-05-03 06:50, Borax Man wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>>>>>> about it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>>>>>> his murderous impulses. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>>>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>>>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>>>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >>>>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >>>>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >>>>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >>>>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. >>>>> >>>>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long >>>>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for >>>>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that >>>>> Windows managed to. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've used it for storage partitions, and on my wifes laptops. So far >>>> its been pretty good, and I've been using it for years now. >>>> >>>> It has a bad repuation, but my personal experience is good. I didn't >>>> use it on this laptop, mostly because I wasn't going to use the >>>> features, needed something basic. Maybe I'll convert this laptop to >>>> BTRFS. >>> >>> I'm always wary of converting one filesystem to another. It just gives >>> me the impression that things are very likely to break. I'm just hoping >>> that I'm not wrong about btrfs and that despite its reputation with >>> some, it's as rock-solid as I've been led to believe. If it isn't, I'll >>> just reinstall and use ext4. >>> >> >> Don't bother unless you've got a good reason to use it. It's good, yes. >> The snapshots are useful, but so are backups. It does introduce some >> new administrative things you have to take care of. >> >> I use it on volumes where I specifically required snapshots, and needed >> checksumming. It's good, but I would still recommend EXT4 for >> situations where BTRFS's additional features are not specifically >> required. > > I can't say that I've ever had problems with ext4, but I also can't say > that I've ever had trouble with btrfs either. If I end up keeping it for > a long time on this laptop, I'll be able to form a, educated opinion > about how reliable btrfs is. I imagine that I might lose data here or > other, but I doubt it will ever be as bad as NTFS. > Just backup. BTRFS didn't have a good FSCK tool when I needed it (it ended up making a dogs breakfast of the filesystem, to correct one error so minor that it had almost no effect at all on the usage of the drive).