Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:

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...
Probably. By the time a few KB of metadata are corrupted, I'm reaching for my backup. I don't care what filesystem it is or how easy it is to edit the on-disk structures.
This isn't to say that having robust on-disk structures isn't a good thing. I have no idea how Reiser4 will hold up either way. But ultimately, what you want is the journaling (so power failure / crashes still leave you in an OK state), backups (so when blocks go bad, you don't care), and performance (so you can spend less money on hardware and more money on backup hardware). 
-
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]
  Powered by Linux