On Tuesday 15 January 2008 03:04, Andrew Morton wrote: > I'm wondering about the real value of this change, really. > > In any decent environment, people will fsck their ext3 filesystems > during planned downtime, and the benefit of reducing that downtime > from 6 hours/machine to 2 hours/machine is probably fairly small, > given that there is no service interruption. (The same applies to > desktops and laptops). > > Sure, the benefit is not *zero*, but it's small. Much less than it > would be with ext2. I mean, the "avoid unplanned fscks" feature is > the whole reason why ext3 has journalling (and boy is that feature > expensive during normal operation). > > So... it's unobvious that the benefit of this feature is worth its > risks and costs? Since I am waiting for an Ext3 fsck to complete right now, I thought I would while away the time by tagging on my "me too" to the concensus that faster fsck is indeed worth the cost, which is (ahem) free. Regards, Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
