[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectAre linux-fs's drive-fault-tolerant by concept?
    Hello all,

    after shooting down one of this bloody cute new very-big-and-poor IDE drives
    today I wonder whether it would be a good idea to give the linux-fs (namely my
    preferred reiser and ext2 :-) some fault-tolerance. I remember there have been
    some discussions along this issue some time ago and I guess remembering that it
    was decided against because it should be the drivers issue to give the fs a
    clean space to live, right?
    Unfortunately todays' reality seems to have gotten a lot worse comparing to one
    year ago. I cannot remember a lot of failed drives back then, but today about
    20% seemed to be already shipped DOA. Most I came across have only small
    problems (few dead sectors), but they seemed to produce quite a lot of trouble
    - at least on my 3ware in non-RAID setup the box partly dies away because
    reiser feels quite unhappy about the non-recoverable disk-errors.
    I know this question can get religious, but to name my only point: wouldn't it
    be a good defensive programming style _not_ to rely on proven-to-be-unreliable
    hardware manufacturers. Thing is: you cannot prevent buying bad hardware these
    days, because just about every manufacturer already sold bad apples ...

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.027 / U:25.636 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site