On Mon, 2006-07-31 12:17:12 -0700, Clay Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20:43 Mon 31 Jul , Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-07-31 20:11:20 +0200, Matthias Andree <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Jan-Benedict Glaw schrieb am 2006-07-31: [Crippled DMA writes] > > > Massive hardware problems don't count. ext2/ext3 doesn't look much better in > > > such cases. I had a machine with RAM gone bad (no ECC - I wonder what > > > > They do! Very much, actually. These happen In Real Life, so I have to > > I think what he meant was that it is unfair to blame reiser3 for data > loss in a massive failure situation as a case example by itself. What Crippling a few KB of metadata in the ext{2,3} case probably wouldn't fobar the filesystem... > failure robustness counts... " This of course assumes you actually had > the *exact* same problem with hardware under ext3, pretty much in every > detail. Of course, so many subtleties interact in massive ways with The point is that it's quite hard to really fuck up ext{2,3} with only some KB being written while it seems (due to the fragile^Wsophisticated on-disk data structures) that it's just easy to kill a reiser3 filesystem. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw [email protected] +49-172-7608481 Signature of: Zensur im Internet? Nein danke! the second :
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: "Horst H. von Brand" <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Adrian Ulrich <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Matthias Andree <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Adrian Ulrich <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Rudy Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Matthias Andree <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- From: Clay Barnes <[email protected]>
- Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- Prev by Date: Re: [stable] [PATCH] initramfs: Allow rootfs to use tmpfs instead of ramfs
- Next by Date: Re: [stable] [PATCH] initramfs: Allow rootfs to use tmpfs instead of ramfs
- Previous by thread: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- Next by thread: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
- Index(es):