Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
[...] If so, this would be an advantage over SU, as
it does surely not use the new introduced BIO_FLUSH. [...]
Soft-updates doesn't handle disk write caches at all.
you're totaly right. I was refering to the assumption of SU that the
drive cache will not "lie" about its handling.
[...] In the other hand i've seen couple of other JFS that went corrupt for "no reason". I don't want to be paranoid, but i
really want to be "sure" that the design is trustable.
Of course a bug in file system (or gjournal) implementation is still
possible and can lead to file system corruption, but such a bug can
still corrupt file system in the way it will not be fixable by fsck.
sooner or later bugs should be fixed. At least i will do some terrible
test to gjournal in the next days. So in case expect some feedback.
From what I saw, file systems with journaling still enforce fsck every X
reboots or on the next reboot after Y days of uptime, whatever comes first.
That is also my experience. So hopefully gjournal will be an exception
for this in the future :-)
Thanks for clarifying and the great job.
Stephan
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
