lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Filesystem Tests
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:45:14PM +0200, Diego Calleja Garc?a wrote:
> El Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:04:27 -0700 Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> escribi?:
>
> >
> > Journaled filesystems have a much smaller chance of having problems after a
> > crash.
>
> I've had (several) filesystem corruption in a desktop system with (several)
> journaled filesystems on several disks. (They seem pretty stable these days,
> though)
>
> However I've not had any fs corrution in ext2; ext2 it's (from my experience)
> rock stable.
>
> Personally I'd consider twice the really "serious" option for a serious server.

I've had corruption caused by hardware, and nothing else. I haven't run
into any serious bugs.

But with servers, the larger your filesystem, the longer it will take to
fsck. And that is bad for uptime. Period.

I would be running ext2 also if I wasn't running so many test kernels (and
they do oops on you), and I've been glad that I didn't have to fsck every
time I oopsed (though I do every once in a while, just to make sure).
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.084 / U:0.652 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site