[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Filesystem Tests
Mike Fedyk <> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:34:10PM +0200, Diego Calleja Garc?a wrote:
> > El Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:06:37 +0400 Hans Reiser <> escribi?:
> >
> > > I don't think ext2 is a serious option for servers of the sort that
> > > Linux specializes in, which is probably why he didn't measure it.
> >
> > Why?
> Because if you have a power outage, or a crash, you have to run the
> filesystem check tools on it or risk damaging it further.
> Journaled filesystems have a much smaller chance of having problems after a
> crash.

Journalled filesytems have a runtime cost, and you're paying that all the

If you're going 200 days between crashes on a disk-intensive box then using
a journalling fs to save 30 minutes at reboot time just doesn't stack up:
you've lost much, much more time than that across the 200 days.

It all depends on what the machine is doing and what your max downtime
requirements are.
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 13:47    [W:0.114 / U:0.992 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site