Eric,
Thanks very much for your note. I'm becoming very leery of resiserfs at
the moment... I'm about to run another series of crash tests.
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Justin Piszcz wrote:
Why avoid XFS entirely?
esandeen, any comments here?
Heh; well, it's the meme.
Well, yeah...
Note also that ext3 has the barrier option as well, but it is not
enabled by default due to performance concerns. Barriers also affect
xfs performance, but enabling them in the non-battery-backed-write-cache
scenario is the right thing to do for filesystem integrity.
So if I understand you correctly, you're stating that current the most
reliable fs in its default configuration, in terms of protection against
power-loss scenarios, is XFS?
--
Moshe Yudkowsky * moshe@xxxxxxxxx * www.pobox.com/~moshe
"There is something fundamentally wrong with a country [USSR] where
the citizens want to buy your underwear." -- Paul Thereaux
-
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
