This may be a stupid question... But it seems obvious to me! If you don't want your journal after a crash, why have a journal? Guy -----Original Message----- From: linux-raid-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-raid-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter T. Breuer Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 4:51 AM To: linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: ext3 journal on software raid (was Re: PROBLEM: Kernel 2.6.10 crashing repeatedly and hard) Neil Brown <neilb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday January 4, andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Except that Peter says that the ext3 journals should be on separate > > non-mirrored devices and the reason this is not mentioned in any > > documentation (md / ext3) is that everyone sees it as obvious. > > Whether it is true or not it's clear to me that it's not obvious to > > everyone. > > If Peter says that, then Peter is WRONG. But Peter does NOT say that. > ext3 journals are much safer on mirrored devices than on non-mirrored That's irrelevant - you don't care what's in the journal, because if your system crashes before committal you WANT the data in the journal to be lost, rolled back, whatever, and you don't want your machine to have acked the write until it actually has gone to disk. Or at least that's what *I* want. But then everyone has different wants and needs. What is obvious, however, are the issues involved. Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
