On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 09:58:43PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote: | xucaen wrote: | >hi all, just looking for information here; why use ext3 journaling fs | >instead of ext2? | | Less likely to suffer catastrophic data loss in the event of a crash.
This is not true. You can still have data loss, but you won't have
filesystem corruption. There is a difference. If some process was
writing to a file while the power went out, it never gets to finish
writing and the kernel won't have a chance to flush the buffers. The
data is gone. However, the inodes and metadata about the file (the
fact that it exists, its name, etc.) are not lost.
| Also, quicker fsck comletion when booting after an unclean umount
| (as happens in a crash).
True.
-D
--
"He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."
--Jim Elliot
www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/ jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
