![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Tomasz Torcz wrote: >On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 07:47:16PM +0200, Thomas Glanzmann wrote: > > >>Hello, >> >> >>>Checksums are not very useful for themselves. They are useful when we >>>have other copy of data (think raid mirroring) so data can be >>>reconstructed from working copy. >>> >>> >>it would be possible to identify data corruption. >> >> > > Yes, but what good is identification? We could only return I/O error. >Ability to fix corruption (like ZFS) is the real killer. > > Having a checksum (or even a digital signature on a file) that lets us detect corruption is very useful since, in many cases, it allows us to flag the file as corrupt before it gets used. In some cases, this is a big hint that you should restore it from backup (tape, other disk, etc). I think that it is a generally useful thing even when not on a self correcting device, ric - 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: 2006-07-06 17:23 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||