Re: Enable asynchronous commits by default patch revoked?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 05:43:36PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Without transaction checksums waiting on all of the blocks together
> > is NOT safe.  If the commit record is on disk, but the rest of the
> > transaction's blocks are not then during replay it may cause garbage
> > to be written from the journal into the filesystem metadata.
> 
> Yes, I *said* that we can only wait on all of the blocks together with
> the commit record when doing journal checksums.  Sorry if I didn't
> make that clear enough.
  I suppose we talk about the case when write caches are turned off and
we use barrier=0 (because case barrier=1 does not really care about when
we wait for the blocks from the correctness POV - at least according to
Documentation/block/barrier.txt). In that case, you have to wait for
*data* blocks before writing the commit block because you have no
checksumming of those...

									Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SuSE CR Labs
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux