[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux 2.6.29
    Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > But I really don't understand filesystem people who think that "fsck" is
    > the important part, regardless of whether the data is valid or not. That's
    > just stupid and _obviously_ bogus.

    I think I can understand that point of view, at least:

    More customers complain about hours-long fsck times than they do about
    silent data corruption of non-fsync'd files.

    > The point is, if you write your metadata earlier (say, every 5 sec) and
    > the real data later (say, every 30 sec), you're actually MORE LIKELY to
    > see corrupt files than if you try to write them together.
    > And if you write your data _first_, you're never going to see corruption
    > at all.


    And, personal filesystem pet peeve: please encourage proper FLUSH CACHE
    use to give users the data guarantees they deserve. Linux's sync(2) and
    fsync(2) (and fdatasync, etc.) should poke the block layer to guarantee
    a media write.


    P.S. Overall, I am thrilled that this ext3/ext4 transition and
    associated slashdotting has spurred debate over filesystem data
    guarantees. This is the kind of discussion that has needed to happen
    for years, IMO.

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-24 20:59    [W:0.047 / U:18.528 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site