Hi Andreas, Today Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Sep 11, 2008 07:43 +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote: > > You are telling me things that I am aware of. The reason I wrote to > > this group is to figure what would happen to an ext3 fs when the > > external journal was lost, especially what happens when it is lost > > on a filesystem where 'data=journal' is set. > > Losing a journal will, in 99% of the cases, mean the loss of only a > few seconds of data. In some rare cases it may be that an inconsistency > from a partially-updated commit will cause e2fsck to become confused > and possibly clean up a small number more files than it would have > otherwise. glad to hear > > Because if it is catastrophic, then it basically means that the > > journal has to reside on a device that is as secure as to rest of > > the data, meaning that if the data is on RAID6 then the journal > > should be on RAID6 too. > > No, because RAID6 is terribly sucky for performance. If you need this > kind of reliability triple-mirrored RAID 1 would be better. Much less > CPU overhead, and no extra IO. true ... do you happen to know how zfs handles it when the intent log is on an ssd ? cheers tobi -- Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland http://it.oetiker.ch tobi@xxxxxxxxxx ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900 _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
