Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3)

[Tupshin Harper <tupshin@tupshin.com>]

Nikita Danilov wrote:

>Daniel Egger writes:
> > 
> > How failsafe is it to switch off the power several times? When the
> > filesystem really works atomically I should have either the old or the
> > new version but no mixture. Does it still need to fsck or is the
> > transaction replay done at mount time? In case one still needs fsck,
> > what's the probability of needing user interaction? How long does it
> > need to get a filesystem back into a consistent state after a powerloss
> > (approx. per MB/GB)?
>
>I should warn everybody that reiser4 is _highly_ _experimental_ at this
>moment. Don't use it for production.
>
I'd like to ask this question differently: How failsafe is reiserfs4 
*theoretically*. Assuming no bugs in implementation, what is the true 
import of its atomic nature? Strengths and potential weaknesses?

-Thanks
-Tupshin