On 6/16/06, Pablo Marín Ramón <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here goes a newbie question about classical FFS (without
As metadata is updated synchronously, can an i-node, at some
point, end pointing to not written yet data blocks? Is this a
security risk, i.e., can those pointed to data blocks pertain to
another user's deleted on memory but not deleted on disk data, or
that deleted data will be marked in metadata as not initialized
and after a crash fsck will fix all i-nodes pointing to it?
The short answer is that fsck can detect the bad inodes and fix or
delete them. Assuming no programming errors, you don't have to worry
about a file containing bogus data after fsck has run. Unfortunately,
if write-caching is enabled on your hard drive (and it probably is,
for speed), then the drive may internally re-order the writes and the
carefully crafted sequence of writes disappears, so there are no
guarantees (or at least, not as many). Whether this is actually a
problem depends on the brand, model, and firmware version of the
drive, because some drives claim that data has been written to the
disk when it is actually only in the drive buffer, while other drives
are more honest.
More details are found in
AFAIK, softupdates and ext3 in the default mode (data=ordered)
don't have this problem, but journalling filesystems that journal
only metadata do. Is this correct?
I think that is answered in the handbook section referenced above.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"