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

[David Masover]

Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 8/1/06, David Masover <ninja@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Yikes.  Undetected.
> >
> > Wait, what?  Disks, at least, would be protected by RAID.  Are you
> > telling me RAID won't detect such an error?
>
> Unless the disk ECC catches it raid won't know anything is wrong.
>
> This is why ZFS offers block checksums... it can then try all the
> permutations of raid regens to find a solution which gives the right
> checksum.

Isn't there a way to do this at the block layer?  Something in 
device-mapper?

> Every level of the system must be paranoid and take measure to avoid
> corruption if the system is to avoid it... it's a tough problem. It
> seems that the ZFS folks have addressed this challenge by building as
> much of what is classically separate layers into one part.

Sounds like bad design to me, and I can point to the antipattern, but 
what do I know?
-
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/