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

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


On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, David Masover wrote:

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).
please read the discussion that took place at the filesystem summit a couple
weeks ago (available on
one of the things that they pointed out there is that as disks get larger the
ratio of bad spots per Gig of storage is remaining about the same. As is the
rate of failures per Gig of storage.
As a result of this the idea of only running on perfect disks that never have
any failures is becomeing significantly less realistic, instead you need to take
measures to survive in the face of minor corruption (including robust
filesystems, raid, etc)
David Lang
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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