While we are at it:
I take it that this is the reason journalling support is only picking up
now: the disks are so big that even in the unlikely event that some of the
hardware failsafes fail, one just cannot fsck all the disks completely
anymore, ever.
Only picking up now??
reiserfs was the first filesystem available for Linux with journaling
support. NTFS for Windows had it a long time ago. Other Unix's had
journaling a long time ago too.
FreeBSD, Solaris and the other BSD's had another theory for file system
reliability and speed implemented under softupdates a long time ago too.
journaling support has been late on Linux. Everything seems to be late
on Linux. Real-time support, preemptive support...
So the choice is really 'borked once, borked forever' / 'journal it and at
least somehow get it back online without fscking /
copying-to-new-disks-if-at-all-possible for 5 days straight'.
No. Choices are: sync only (no write caching), turn on softupdates if
supported, turn on various degrees of journaling if supported or async
only (who cares?)
If you have fsync/fsyncdata available, databases, mtas and other
software should not care less how the filesystem is mounted.
