Reiser FS or ext3?

[Billy Crook]

Journalling the files themselves would be redundant in XFS because new
files and changes to files are Copy-on-write.  The new sector is
written first (even if the file isn't growing) then the metadata is
updated.  If any part of the write fails the metadata will be pointing
back at the original sectors untainted by the failed write.

Don't go setting filesystem requirements like how Journaltastic it has
to be, unless you know the limits of usefulness and relevance of those
requirements.  If you're going to set requirements don't base them on
the inner workings of the filesystem, but what you need to do with it.
 (Survive power failures without filesystem corruption)  When it comes
time to choose a filesystem, pick ext3.  It's just the right choice
unless you think you need more than 8TB of filesystem space.  XFS can
do that, but you're better off using multiple ext3 filesystems, and
symlinks.

Ext3 it (at least as of today) Linux' filesystem.  Period.  There are
thousands of choices.  Only one right one (ext), and ext's current
extremely stable version is 3.

That said, if you need a sql driven filesystem, try fuse-mysqls:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysqlfs/
http://www.linux.com/feature/127055?theme=print

Storing its data in mysql, you can use mysql's native high
availability clustering to keep multiple instances on multiple
machines in sync, at all times, without scripts, inotify, or a SAN.
Just don't count on any degree of performance.