On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:14:16 -0800
Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net> wrote:

quoted text
> On Wednesday 12 March 2008 22:39, David Newall wrote:
> > Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > Particularly about Ext2/Ext3, which does recover well from random damage.
> > > My experience.
> > 
> > By "recover well", you must mean "loses massive swabs of data, leaving
> > the system unbootable and with enormous numbers of user files missing." 
> > My experience.
> > 
> > Expecting fsck to cover for missed writes is stupid.
> 
> Whatever it can get off the disk it gets.  It does a good job.  If you
> don't think so, then don't tell me, tell Ted.

He knows. Ext3 cannot recover well from massive loss of intermediate
writes. It isn't a normal failure mode and there isn't sufficient fs
metadata robustness for this. A log structured backing store would deal
with that but all you apparently want to do is scream FUD at anyone who
doesn't agree with you.

Alan
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/