![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 19 April 2003 23:33, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Apr 19, 2003 21:04 +0100, John Bradford wrote: > > > > > I wonder whether it would be a good idea to give the linux-fs > > > > > (namely my preferred reiser and ext2 :-) some > > > > > fault-tolerance. > > I'm not against this in principle, but in practise it is almost > useless. Modern disk drives do bad sector remapping at write time, so > unless something is terribly wrong you will never see a write error > (which is exactly the time that the filesystem could do such > remapping). Normally, you will only see an error like this at read > time, at which point it is too late to fix. It is *not* useless. I have at least 4 disks with some bad sectors. Know what? They are still in use in a school lab and as 'big diskettes' (transferring movies etc). I refuse to dump them just because 'todays disks are cheap'. I don't want my fs to die just because these disks develop (ohhhh) a single new bad sector. -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:34 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||