Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jul 2006 22:55:23 +0200 | From | Tomasz Torcz <> | Subject | Re: ext4 features |
| |
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 10:22:19PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote: > On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 08:17:02PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 07:47:16PM +0200, Thomas Glanzmann wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > > Checksums are not very useful for themselves. They are useful when we > > > > have other copy of data (think raid mirroring) so data can be > > > > reconstructed from working copy. > > > > > > it would be possible to identify data corruption. > > > > > > > Yes, but what good is identification? We could only return I/O error. > > Ability to fix corruption (like ZFS) is the real killer. > > Isn't that what we have RAID-1/5/6 for?
ZFS was already called ,,blatant layering violation''. ;) Yes,that what RAID is for. And if we want checksums in filesystem, that's the best way to utilise them.
-- Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality. zdzichu@irc.-nie.spam-.pl -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |