Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 6 Jul 2000 07:59:20 -0500 (CDT) | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: ext3-0.0.2e released |
| |
Ookhoi <ookhoi@dds.nl>: > Hi Miquel, > > > In article <cistron.20000706093557.F13402@ookhoi.dds.nl>, > > Ookhoi <ookhoi@dds.nl> wrote: > > >Why not use Reiserfs? I think journaling is a must with disks that > > >large, and reiserfs is faster dan ext2 if you have a lot of files/dirs > > >in a directory. > > > > Ehrm. Look at the subject of this thread. What do you think "ext3" is ;) > > Yeah, I know, but then again, why do they all want to fsck? We have so > many nice journaling file systems now.
Every filesystem has the potential to loose data blocks. Journaling filesystems maintain the necessary metadata to access allocated blocks without logical failures. BUT - sometimes deallocated blocks get lost. hence the need for some form of fsck that can rebuild it.
When XFS (from SGI) was first released on the SGI platform, there was no fsck available. After many crashes (they were frequent) the free space in the filesystem tended to become small. It got to the point that the filesystem even became unusable (a 16GB partition, with 3GB used had a maximum size of 4GB...). xfs_check came into existance (fsck by any name is still an fsck function...). If xfs_check showed errors, then xfs_repair was used to fix it. Suddenly the 16GB partition became 16GB again. took about 20 minutes though...
The advantage to journaling filesystems is that you get to schedule when to run the fsck, it isn't necessary immediately on boot (unless a MAJOR failure occurs). This ability gets the system back on the air faster.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesse I Pollard, II Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |