So, does this mean I shouldn't be using data=journal with my 2.4.18 kernel? Thanks, --jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@zip.com.au> To: "Daniel Pittman" <daniel@rimspace.net> Cc: <ext3-users@redhat.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 7:02 PM Subject: Re: is EXT3 data=journal, 2K block size, 2.5 series kernel stable? > Daniel Pittman wrote: > > > > A while back, after 2.5.6, there were various changes made to the kernel > > that resulted in some instability with journaled data on ext3 > > filesystems, as well as small issues with my 2k block size file systems. > > > > Can someone (say, Andrew Morton ;) comment on the stability of the > > current release with this sort of configuration? > > > > If it's not full of known bugs then I will give it another shot, but I > > don't want to waste time finding out that it's still known to be broken > > myself. :) > > > > Nope. data=journal is bust on 2.5. It's also bust on 2.4, for > the same reason. > > The problem arises from the mixing of regular write(2) operations > and the writepage() function. In 2.4, writepage() doesn't get > called much. In 2.5, it gets called all the time, and so the > problem manifests more in 2.5. > > I think Stephen and I agreed on the way to fix it last week, > but I haven't got onto coding it yet. Probably next week. > > - > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ext3-users@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users >
