On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Jesse Pollard wrote:
> Ookhoi <ookhoi@dds.nl>:
> > Hi Miquel,
> >
> > > In article <cistron.20000706093557.F13402@ookhoi.dds.nl>,
> > > Ookhoi <ookhoi@dds.nl> wrote:
> > > >Why not use Reiserfs? I think journaling is a must with disks that
> > > >large, and reiserfs is faster dan ext2 if you have a lot of files/dirs
> > > >in a directory.
> > >
> > > Ehrm. Look at the subject of this thread. What do you think "ext3" is ;)
> >
> > Yeah, I know, but then again, why do they all want to fsck? We have so
> > many nice journaling file systems now.
>
> Every filesystem has the potential to loose data blocks. Journaling filesystems
> maintain the necessary metadata to access allocated blocks without logical
> failures. BUT - sometimes deallocated blocks get lost. hence the need for
> some form of fsck that can rebuild it.
>
But, they really should not. The latest ext3 release has code to prevent
these lost files from chewing up space (by finishing the delete after a
crash), and I've got something similar for reiserfs almost done.
This does not remove the need for fsck. The list of ways data can be lost
is huge ;-)
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 07 2000 - 21:00:18 EST