Hi Vyacheslav, > The result of unclean shutdown and big update timeout will be a long > mount. And such issue was reported earlier and it was fixed. I don't > think that Andreas's patch can resolve long mount principally. Maybe > this approach can slightly reduce mount time in such situation. So even without Andreas' patch there is no risk for data loss with a very outdated superblock - but recovery would be slower? > In such case NILFS2 at whole is in trouble. Because partial segments can > have different size. And these sizes doesn't correlate with sizes of > physical erase block or physical writing units. And the whole COW > approach is useless. Sure, NILFS won't cure the horrible write-amplification of those devices, but it will spread the wear evenly over the whole device thanks to COW. So it won`t wear out the meadia faster where it`s metadata is stored (with exception of the superblock) like ext4 does. Btw. isn't nilfs's minimal writing size 128kb (I remember I read it in a paper somewhere)? Regards, Clemens -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
