Talk:Reiser4

message: Well personally, this article is very scant. Its really more like a stub. In fact, if no one objects, I'd add the stub tag to it. Namely, it only generalises the features of reiserfs, does not explain why its that way...ie. it does not mention the fact that it uses dancing trees instead of B+ trees, or several other critical principles. I think we could all agree that someone who has expertise in this area should improvise. Take for example, the windows filesystem FAT32, its quite a simple filesystem, far more inferior (we can agree on that, I think, that FAT32 is far less advanced) - yet it has dozen or more long paragraphs. Surely this article deserves more? --  Natalinasmpf 04:13, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The article seems to have passed the stub stage.  Would anyone mind if I archived (deleted) the above comment?  It doesn't seem to apply anymore, and then the TOC for this talk page could move to the top. --- Markspace 23:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Problem solved. AlistairMcMillan 01:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub

message: The Journaling link seems to point to a list of writing techniques (as in, literature writing.) Can someone more knowledgeable than me give a better description of Journaling with respect to Filesystems and link to that? --RustB 03:30, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This has already been fixed by someone. -- intgr 16:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journaling Link 

message: Does anyone know a good source for following the inclusing process of reiser4 into the kernel? Chotchki 00:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: KernelTrap or the Reiser Mailinglist http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.reiserfs.general --Hhielscher 00:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further information 

message: I've moved the following from the article.
: Reiser4 is of very questionable stability at its current state. While the creators state they cannot make it crash any longer, there are still frequent reports of corruption and data loss. As with any new technology, avoid using in production.
The POV style of the text isn't really good, without some better citations I think we should leave it at the obvious.. the article already says that it's beta still and we really should leave it at that. --Gmaxwell 02:38, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: File operations are atomic as specified in POSIX standards in every journalling Linux file system. Maybe you are confused by the fact that Reiser4 was going to export some sort of API for transactions, but that never happened. -- intgr [talk] 13:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Stability

message: The second paragraph ends with "at the moment".  I can't tell if this is true today, and in 5 years time I will really have no way to tell.  Can someone state an approximation for when inclusion in Linux became the priority. 85.28.66.218 19:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you can tell by checking the diffs when the comment was added.  I agree with what you are saying, though, "at the moment" is not clear to a casual reader.  I think there is a wiki date format that allows it to change from, something like, "now" to "as of Dec. 25, 2005".  Let me see if I can find it and I'll add it to the article. --- Markspace 23:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You want As of 2006 or the like... That way, the "as of" page will list this article as having assumptions that need to be rechecked later. Zuiram 10:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  can "at the moment" be dated? 

message: It is typically twice the performance of ext3 for general-purpose filesystem usage patterns, but since most real-world applications are not heavily utilising the filesystem, the performance improvements might not be noticeable.
I am quite dubious that "most" real-world applications do not heavily use the filesystem.  Seeing that there's no citation, I'm removing that claim.  Clement Cherlin 22:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be fairly obvious that the average application rarely does more than open a few files and do straightforward reads/writes on them, with the bottleneck being speed of the CPU, hard drive, internet connection, etc. Heavy use, where filesystem performance really starts to matter, is when dealing with (hundreds of) thousands of files. That said, I guess the claim should be removed for now unless anyone can point to some real sources. -- intgr 07:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my experience, most tasks are either I/O bound (file system, network, etc.) or memory bound (memory bandwidth / latency). Usually they're disk I/O bound if you're serving a LAN, e.g. SQL server. This all varies widely, though, and it was a very encyclopaedic statement. Zuiram 10:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filesystem performance unimportant? 

message: Should we mention the future of Reiser4 is currently in doubt with the arrest of Hans Reiser? Nil Einne 14:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say no – I don't think it will make a big difference. Namesys will probably still remain operational, with or without Hans Reiser. And as the Reiser4 code is GPLed, Linux developers are free to merge it without anyone's consent, once someone sorts the remaining issues out. As far as I can tell, comments from Hans Reiser himself often made the problems worse for the code review/merge of the filesystem. -- intgr 15:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alexander Lyamin from Namesys says that development on Reiser4 will continue . -- intgr 19:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well a long time later and I wrote the above with limited experience with wikipedia and BLP (which was less than a year old). Clearly there should have been no comment on Hans Reiser's arrest in relation to Reiser4 without good sourcing. That said while hindsight is 20-20, it looks like I was mostly right. From what I can tell Reiser4 is still out of the Linux kernel and seems to be in some sort of no man's land. btrfs is probably the best alternative (I've read some suggesting it's overtaken Reiser4 by now), and maybe ZFS for those not bothered by licencing concerns (or for those outside the Linux world). Of course we can never know what would have happened if Hans Reiser hadn't done what he did, the IP has a point that perhaps he wasn't a help in many ways. But at the same time, actually having a company behind it would likely have helped. While Intgr was right, it was theoretically possible for Namesys to survive, it didn't. I don't think this is that surprising since while I know little about them, it sounds like they were in many ways Hans Reiser's company and further the main thing the company did was develop ReiserFS and Reiser4. In particular, I assume they offered paid support for those file systems and their users. Even if they had the management team etc to survive the arrest and any sale, buying a company from someone accused of murdering their wife, and where the company's primary new product is a file system still not in the Linux kernel and with no clear prospective for it being in, named after said person accused of murdering their wife and where their old product had just been abandoned by one of the only significant users and likewise was named after said person, doesn't sound that appealing. I also wonder whether some of the developers both those who worked for Namesys and those for other companies and independently, were some demoralised by what happened. (Especially those who worked for Namesys, since it sounds a bit like why weren't surprised by the arrest and may have also expected the eventual outcome. Also from what I've read, quite a few of them were in Russia which may not have helped.) I can't help wondering if it was also a factor in the development of btrfs, although OTOH, even without Reiser doing what he did, it doesn't sound like he was the easiest person to work with. Nil Einne (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hans Reiser arrest 

message: I didn't want to go ahead and remove an entire section without consulting first. Isn't it a bit silly, and leaning towards an add to say that The only distro to use R4 by default is thingy? Martijn Hoekstra 22:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks out of place indeed. -- intgr 23:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distributions 

message: The citation of http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9509 is incorrect, first of all, because the original source of that forum post is located here: http://linuxhelp.150m.com/. And second of all, I challenge the citation because the source is very questionable. The person who wrote that page has made multiple unfounded accusations and assertions on his page that themselves really need citation. For instance, after displaying some benchmarks of Reiser4 vs other filesystems, he states in red text (for emphasis), "As you can see, REISER4 is a truly remarkable filesystem. This is the real reason that REISER4 has not been included in the Linux kernel. This is the real reason that Hans Reiser languishes in an Oakland prison cell at this time." I am not convinced this person is mentally stable, and that this citation should be changed to point to a more reliable and accurate source. Neunon (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation re: sabotage is questionable 

message: Do you think it is necessary to mention in _this_ article that he killed his wife? I think it is background information about the creator, and not really belongs in here. What's your opinion? -- Keks ger (talk) 21:41, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took out the "murderer" bit in the lead. That was rather irrelevant and over-the-top (and it was just added today). It's still mentioned in the "Future of ReiserFS" section, but that seems relevant, at least to me, since he was the main architect of the filesystem, and, being imprisoned, he can no longer work on it, which is why the future of the filesystem is up in the air. --Slowking Man (talk) 23:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "convicted murderer" in here? 

message: Following some talk on lkml.org, I got the impression, that Edward Shishkin seems to be the guy, who heads all decisions. Should we actually name him the new maintainer of the Reiser4 file system in the article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.142.216 (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  new maintainer Edward Shishkin? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Reiser4. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.namesys.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Reiser4. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100324124748/http://chichkin_i.zelnet.ru/namesys/ to http://chichkin_i.zelnet.ru/namesys/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://linuxhelp.150m.com/installs/compile-kernel.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://linuxhelp.150m.com/installs/install-on-reiser4.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified