On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 04:59:40 +0000 Andy Smith <a...@strugglers.net> wrote: <snip> > > My understanding is that the only thing that prevents silent > > corruption in ext4 is the hard drive CRC (Cyclic Redundancy Check > > Error). Is that enough for a server? > > No, not with multi-terabyte devices. CRC doesn't detect well enough, > also errors can happen at different places that CRC can't always > detect.
I use RAID5 and reiserfs the only problem I've had so far is RAM corruption (Ugh!). reierfs is very reliable, does not loose data in the presence of being unmounted unsuccessfully, WHICH XFS DOES REALLY BADLY(I think I even saw a video in which an fs dev said that xfs does this on purpose so that an sensitive data does not remain on the drive). I also tried fat32, but in the presence of being unmounted incorrectly you'll get some data loss, but not corruption, that is to say that fat32 seems to behave like an atomic fs; either the data is on the drive or not. Same with ext4 except that I have gotten many corruptions if it's not properly unmounted. Nilfs2 seems to have a bug someplace in the kernel (4.9), but I've not yet narrowed it down. I don't know anything about others then those listed above. Yes, I've been really busy trying to find a good FS. > The worst I've seen on the zfsonlinux list in the last couple of > years is people reporting abnormally low performance in their > configuration. > > Cheers, > Andy > Actually, I've read that zfs can only mount on a *totally* empty directory. Also, my use case is at home where the power can and *does* fail. I also find myself using the latest kernel and oftentimes an experimental driver for my AMD graphics card, hence my need for a *very* stable fs over sudden unmount. Sincerely, David