I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

elgatofelix · 2008-03-25 04:20:28

I will drop jfs: it isnt stable (i dont really know if it is declared so but i say it isnt ).

Three months ago i got i mess in 4 or 6 files messed up (tested code the last night at that time got messed to the point it wasnt valid code) and those are the files i just could check.

Yesterday i got a big mess in my home partition:
-Lots of movies got modified to 0 bytes!
-Code directory wasnt code directory anymore it was a pile of random bytes.

OF THAT'S NOT STABLE I DONT KNOW HOW TO NAME IT
And in a fast google search about JFS its easy to find similar complains about that..

In the first disaster with JFS i had the / partition and my /home partition, so i decided to format / to ext3 but for laziness or i dunno
i kept /home as it was, now /home will be ext3 too

As a conclusion i have to say that if it is not for rebundancy data (backups made with a simple rsync script) i would get into PANIC,
and the PARADOX is that the partition for backups is JFS too

Have u had problems with JFS too ? write about that

cactus.ed · 2008-03-25 04:54:59

That sucks, I've never had a problem with JFS. I've had a couple files corrupted by XFS (files that were open when the computer went down unexpectedly) and a couple ext3 partitions lost when their super block mysteriously went corrupt.

--nate

disturbed1 · 2008-03-25 05:53:02

I've used JFS for 4 years on the same disk, never an issue here (knock on wood). XFS, now that's a different story , but I used it years ago around the time Suse first debuted it with their distro (7.2?) Never bothered going too far with Reiser because of it's speed, cpu usage and slow mounting time. If you're dealing with a huge number of small files (NNTP server) reiser fits the bill perfectly.

TBH, if you experienced corruption with JFS, the disc would have been just as likely to see corruption with Reiser, XFS or even ext3. Though, I'm completely unsure if your chance of recovery would have been any greater with a different file system. I've only had experience running fsck on ext3 systems. It managed to recover the files, until the next crash. Turned out to be a failing hard drive that caused the issues. Hate to speculate anything, but before you put any more data on that drive, no matter what FS, be sure to get the OEM tools and test the drive out.

Some test reports to help you choose a different FS.
http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388
http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html

dr_te_z · 2008-03-25 06:38:00

Sorry topic starter. I've used JFS on slackware in the past, I'm using JFS on arch now. I'm happy, sorry.
But, must admit, I've never had trouble with any file-system and I've tried a few.

wuischke · 2008-03-25 08:39:16

There's a thread about some man3-missing after a fsck on jfs and I could reproduce this behaviour.

Still, I use jfs for everything except /boot (ext2 for performance reasons) and my backup (ext3, because I might have to read it from OpenBSD/Windows/Linux without jfs support) and I'm happy using it.

iphitus · 2008-03-25 08:55:05

Check it's not disk problems first before blaming the filesystem...

stylopath · 2008-03-25 09:06:03

+1 for Iphitus' statement.

I use jfs on ALL my drives and never had any data-loss.
It now runs on 3 partitions on my notebook, 2 partitions on my desktop-pc, 3 partitions on my girlfriends notebook, and 4 partitions on a friends notebook.

All of them had unexpected poweroffs in the past, without losing any data.

attila · 2008-03-25 22:17:16

elgatofelix wrote:

I will drop jfs: it isnt stable (i dont really know if it is declared so but i say it isnt ).

I be afraid if we drop every kernel module about which a google research reports something bad because than we could lost a lot of them

First, i can understand your trouble because i think everybody have had such a case in the past and i wish you the best. Second, in a lot of cases where having problems with filesystems checking the hardware is a good idea because this could be the beginning of a complete loss too. So i suggest the same as iphitus and perhaps the Hard Disk Diagnostic Tools from Ultimate Boot CD (http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/index.html) be something for you.

elgatofelix wrote:

Have u had problems with JFS too ? write about that

Sorry to say for you that i have no problems on 3 pc (1 server under opensuse) and running rsync several times per day for a couple of years. The only difference to you is that i even have a /boot partition with ext2 but all other partitions been jfs.

iBertus · 2008-03-25 22:53:48

I've found JFS to be rock solid on both my desktop machine and laptop. I use it daily and even with frequent crashes (my laptop BIOS hates linux) the filesystem and my data are still intact. Also, JFS seems to use far less CPU time for activity than other filesystems I've tried, and that's handy for extra battery time (not much) for mobile users. I'd say that my worst filesystem experience under linux is probably Reiser4. It was utter crap! Granted, I'm not sure how it's turned out and this was a pair of years back.

neowolf · 2008-03-27 20:28:10

I've had no trouble with JFS on my desktop for quite a while now, across several distros. So count me in for the no problems crowd.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-03-25 04:20:28

I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#2 2008-03-25 04:54:59

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#3 2008-03-25 05:53:02

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#4 2008-03-25 06:38:00

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#5 2008-03-25 08:39:16

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#6 2008-03-25 08:55:05

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#7 2008-03-25 09:06:03

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#8 2008-03-25 22:17:16

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#9 2008-03-25 22:53:48

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

#10 2008-03-27 20:28:10

Re: I dont trust in JFS: a call to flame on JFS

Board footer