Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm trying to change an existing ext4 partition to reiserFS in Centos 6.3 64bit.

I've updated the kernel to Centos Plus:

First, I've updated /etc/yum.repos.d/CentOS-Base.repo:

  • In the [centosplus] section:

    enabled=1
    includepkgs=kernel*
    

Then I ran yum ypdate and my Kernel was updated to Centos Plus:

[root@vappsil disk]# uname -r
2.6.32-279.11.1.el6.centos.plus.x86_64

Then, I've added this to /etc/yum.repos.d/CentOS-Base.repo

  • into the [centosplus] section:

    includepkgs=kernel* jfsutils reiserfs-utils
    
  • into the [base] and [updates] section:

    includepkgs=kernel* jfsutils reiserfs-utils
    

But when trying to execute:

yum install reiserfs-utils

I get:

No package reiserfs-utils available.

How can I install the reiserFS-utils package to create a reiserFS partition?

share|improve this question
    
Why? Are you trying to use Reiser to solve a particular problem? –  ewwhite Oct 28 '12 at 13:57
2  
Why? Do you want to kill your files? –  Michael Hampton Oct 28 '12 at 13:57
1  
It's a killer filesystem, but not in a good way. –  Lucas Kauffman Oct 28 '12 at 14:03
    
I have a slow database performance, simple INSERT queries takes much more time on my own server than on a simple GoDaddy Centos 5.8 32bit server. I've seen that the database files on the GoDaddy server are on a reiserFS file system. Do you have any idea what can be the problem ? Or how can I tune the ext4 file system to Database performance ? –  Alon_A Oct 28 '12 at 14:10
add comment

3 Answers

up vote 12 down vote accepted

Don't do it. ReiserFS is not regarded as a good filesystem option these days and may not be under active development.

You have several other solid filesystem options here in 2012. Are you trying to solve a particular problem? If so, XFS, btrfs, maybe even tuning of your ext4, may be better ideas for supportability and compatibility.

Oh yeah, and there's this... (do you trust that face?)

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
1  
@Alon_A There are some filesystem tuning steps that could make a difference. I'd like to refer you to my answer to this question, or advise you to open a new question on how to tune your database's FS performance. With RHEL 6.x, your biggest gain will come from changing the I/O scheduler to deadline. –  ewwhite Oct 28 '12 at 14:11
6  
@PeterTeoh it would be a bad business and technical decision to deploy a filesystem like Reiser today. No mainstream support, shaky mindshare and is a solution to a problem that other filesystems have fixed. Also, the OP found their solution in this answer. –  ewwhite Apr 24 at 14:24
5  
Using ReiserFS sounds good, but the support these days will kill you. –  RobM Apr 24 at 14:27
2  
@PeterTeoh ReiserFS is only the best answer if the question is "how can I use Linux to kill my wife?" –  HopelessN00b Apr 24 at 14:27
2  
+1 for a mugshot. –  BigHomie Apr 24 at 14:27
show 4 more comments

First of all, let me respond to the ReiserFS naysayers:

a) ReiserFS3 is a stable, fast, space-efficient (specially with lots of small files), reasonably maintained (just check the kernel changelogs) and extremely robust filesystem: I've used ReiserFS in all my servers (a few dozen of them) since 2001 or so and it has never given me any trouble. In fact, in a client of mine with constant electrical power interruptions, they repeatedly had to restore EXT4-based machines from backups because the entire filesystem was frequently hosed beyond fsck repair, but the CentOS servers we configured for them almost 4 years ago (using ReiserFS3 of course) have never ever lost any data (and just keep on going to this day). I've noticed reader-writer-consistency problems with some of the more modern kernels (2.6.37 comes to mind), but with all stable 2.6.x kernels up to and including 2.6.32, ReiserFS3 runs solidly as a rock.

b) Of course what Hans Reiser did is wrong, and I for one am glad he's in prison paying for his crime. But an idea isn't responsible for the acts of its creator... Or would anyone seriously propose that Hans Reiser's murder of his wife is in any way connected with the ReiserFS filesystem?

c) The OP requested a solution to run ReiserFS on his CentOS server, not a lecture on the merits of other filesystems and/or the demerits of Mr. Hans Reiser, so I think we would all do a lot better if we just stick to the matter at hand.

That said, here's the solution the OP asked for:

1) Add the ElRepo repository to your YUM configuration: just follow the directions at the "Get Started" section of the ElRepo site.

2) Run "yum update" to pull in repo metadata about the available packages;

3) Run "yum install kmod-reiserfs reiserfs-utils"; that way you will install both the kernel module and the needed userland utility programs (mount, mkfs, fsck, etc).

Done!

share|improve this answer
4  
+1 for the impassioned defense of Reiser. However, the OP's performance problems are a result of the new kernel scheduling algoritms in the 6.x release of Red Hat/CentOS. Filesystem choice was irrelevant at this point. Furthermore, I would not advocate deploying a dying or dead filesystem because of long-term stability and support concerns. There are indeed better options out there. –  ewwhite Oct 28 '12 at 16:54
add comment

ReiserFS does not appear to be supported at all in RHEL 6 / CentOS 6. No such package exists in the CentOS repositories, nor is filesystem support available in the kernel.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.