Comment 3 for bug 1241758

Different users have different requirements, and you guys are creating big problems with us.

We've been using Reiserfs for over a decade due to its tail packing (we have many small files) and excellent inherent filesystem recovery. Our data have survived many hardware failures without resorting to backups. Actual experience with many servers over many years, in actual production! Not just theory!

Our experiments with XFS were disastrous; we lost a lot of data, and even after we bought proprietary tools to recover, must data were lost. That has NEVER happened to us with Reiserfs (reiser3).

WIthout tail-packing, ext4 is extremely disk-space-inefficient for us, with our jillions of small files, and when we boot, the machine may go off on a lengthy file system check, leaving us without access to a perhaps-urgently-needed host or its data. The alternative, of course, is to waste our precious human-time doing, egad, file system maintenance chores. That's crazy!

I guess we'll try JFS now, because it has tail-packing. But I note there's apparently nothing for JFS that's comparable to Reiser's free --rebuild-tree option. Just a project, jfsrec, that may or may not work when things go awry.

THIS IS NOT GOOD! Why take away something that's so important, so useful, so robust, so human-time-efficient, as Reiser3???? To save 200K on the installer disk? That's just crazy.