[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible
    On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 01:30:51PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
    > + Unfortunately, none of the cheap USB/SD flash cards I've seen
    > + do behave like this, and are thus unsuitable for all Linux
    > + filesystems I know.

    When you say Linux filesystems do you mean "filesystems originally
    designed on Linux" or do you mean "filesystems that Linux supports"?
    Additionally whatever the answer, people are going to need help
    answering the "which is the least bad?" question and saying what's not
    good without offering alternatives is only half helpful... People need
    to put SOMETHING on these cheap (and not quite so cheap) devices... The
    last recommendation I heard was that until btrfs/logfs/nilfs arrive
    people are best off sticking with FAT - . Perhaps that
    should be mentioned?

    > +* either write caching is disabled, or hw can do barriers and they are enabled.
    > +
    > + (Note that barriers are disabled by default, use "barrier=1"
    > + mount option after making sure hw can support them).
    > +
    > + hdparm -I reports disk features. If you have "Native
    > + Command Queueing" is the feature you are looking for.

    The document makes it sound like nearly everything bar battery backed
    hardware RAIDed SCSI disks (with perfect firmware) is bad - is this
    the intent?

    Sitsofe |

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-16 20:43    [W:0.027 / U:0.516 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site