Hi! > > That is data that was freshly touched around the time the system went down, right? > > > > I.e. data that was probably half-modified by user-space to begin with. > > It's data that wasn't synced out yet, yes. Which isn't the problem per > se. With ext3/4 in ordered mode, or xfs, or btrfs the file size won't > be incremented until the data is written. in ext3/4 in writeback mode > (or various non-journaling filesystems) however the inode size is > updated, and metadagta changes are logged. Besides exposing stale > data which is a security risk in multi-user systems it also means the > inode looks modified (by size and timestamps), but contains other data > than actually written. Well, afaict thats traditional unix behaviour... while it is not user friendly, I'd not call it 'corrupted filesytem'. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>