On 12/08/2010 11:56 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:ricwheeler@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:On 12/08/2010 06:52 AM, Dan Kennedy wrote: Thanks. But to be clear, is data=ordered better than data=writeback wrt. data integrity following a power failure? Regards, Dan. Data integrity can mean a couple of different things. If you are file system meta-data centric (i.e., a file system developer or just worried about having to run fsck after a crash to repair the file system), then both options *should* be equivalent. If you are one of those annoying users who define data integrity to include those annoying details like will my file have garbage in it after a crash that will make my DB or other app puke, then data ordered is clearly more robust.Thanks, Ric. Yes, we are numbered among the "annoying users". Based on what you are telling us, we'll recommend that people use data=ordered, barrier=1 for maximum data reliability in the face of power loss.
That is what I do as well - there are use cases and users that prefer the lower latency and can accept the trade offs that come with data writeback or non-barrier use, but I certainly think most users would be better using the settings you have above.
Good luck! Ric _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
