On 17/08/17 15:31, Gionatan Danti wrote: > However, the entire idea of barriers/cache flushes/FUAs was to *safely > enable* unprotected write caches, even in the face of powerloss. Indeed, > for full-system powerloss their are adequate. However, device-level > micro-powerlosses seem to pose an bigger threat to data reliability. Which is fine until the drive, bluntly put, lies to you. Cheaper drives are prone to this, in order to look good in benchmarks. Especially as it's hard to detect until you get screwed over by exactly this sort of thing. Cheers, Wol -- 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
