Re: Linux 2.6.29

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Theodore Tso wrote:
>
> With ext2 after a system crash you need to run fsck.  With ext4, fsck
> isn't an issue,

Bah. A corrupt filesystem is a corrupt filesystem. Whether you have to 
fsck it or not should be a secondary concern.

I personally find silent corruption to be _worse_ than the non-silent one. 
At least if there's some program that says "oops, your inode so-and-so 
seems to be scrogged" that's better than just silently having bad data in 
it.

Of course, never having bad data _nor_ needing fsck is clearly optimal. 
data=ordered gets pretty close (and data=journal is unacceptable for 
performance reasons).

But I really don't understand filesystem people who think that "fsck" is 
the important part, regardless of whether the data is valid or not. That's 
just stupid and _obviously_ bogus.

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