Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/24/2010 03:12 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >>> Well, safety is not boolean. Considering to make it mostly safe instead >>> of completely safe because of the performance doesn't mean that we >>> should make it completely unsafe. >>> >> What is safety then? A vague feeling of "oh today is monday so my data >> is safe, but on tuesday I always lose my image data"? Either we promise >> to keep data safe or we don't. There is no in between. >> > > Do you drive a car?
Would you buy a car where the breaks are known to not always work? ;) > Though in general I agree we shouldn't compromise on data integrity. That's my point. Either we go for it or we don't. Alex
