To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The patches keep previously existing files from ending up truncated after a crash. But new files that were created less then 60 seconds before the crash will still show up as 0 length files. Data and metadata still have a large window of time in which they are out of sync.
In contrast, with ext3, the files would either exist, or they would not. If the crash occurred at least 5 seconds after the write, they would exist and contain the expected data. If the crash occurred less than five seconds after, this might still be the case. But in the worst case, the files are not written at all. In all cases, ext3 would maintain the disk in either its state before the completed write, or its state afterwards, data and metadata remaining in sync.
You say that I should just use ext3. But that's not the point. Sacrificing Linux's reputation for reliability for the sake of better benchmark numbers is simply not a good trade.





Member since:
2005-07-06
I'm really not an expert on the area. If you are, this is the patch that's in Fedora's kernel:
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/kernel/devel/linux-2.6-ext...
if you're an expert and understand exactly what the hell they're talking about, go ahead and look and see if that's the behaviour you'd like or not. If not, then use ext3 instead, I guess.