> That depends heavily on what you consider "safe". OK, right. What I really meant is "does not impose additional risks in case of a power loss, hardware failure or panic". Where "additional" means "compared to the same thing with write-trough".
> largely because I have sufficient backup mechanisms in place I do have sufficient backup mechanisms in place in the sense that I can recover from total data loss. But that, being off-site, takes several days. OTOH, I would like my definition of "safe" to include "being able to reliably detect possible data corruption or loss after a crash". > So, for my purposes - personal machines I'm not talking about my personal machines but a file server hosting a few hundred people's home directories and mail storage. So I probably need to be a bit more paranoid about data integrity than with my personal machines.
