> I think the work done by the U. Wisconsin group for IRON ext3 is the
> way to go (namely checksumming of filesystem metadata, and possibly
> some level of redundancy). This gives us concrete checks on what metadata
> is valid and the filesystem can avoid any (or further) corruption when
> the hardware goes bad. The existing ext3 code already has these checks,
> but as filesystems get larger the validity of a block number of an inode
> is harder to check because any value may be correct. Given that CPU
> speed is growing orders of magnitude faster than disk IO the overhead of
> checksumming is a reasonable thing to do these days (optionally, of course).
Then please make it optionally per mount-point.
E.g.: I don't care if the filesystem of the filestore of my Squid setup
goes bad (mke2fs will fix it just nicely) but I would get upset if its
OS filesystem would get corrupted.
Folkert van Heusden
--
Ever wonder what is out there? Any alien races? Then please support
the seti@home project: setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
