| |||||||||||||
The new file systems:The new file systems:Posted Nov 30, 2006 18:04 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: The new file systems: by job Parent article: Kernel release status
Just thinking idly here... I'd also be very happy if ext4 did tail packing. That said, I'd also like a flag that turns off all possible optimizations, reducing the amount of code that runs to a bare minimum. My mail spool is an example of a high-use volume where I can tolerate a bug or two: mount it -o3. My sarbanes-oxley archive is big, dumb, and slow, but I need it to be TOTALLY stable: mount it -o0.
I'll second your desire to see a cluster filesystem article too. :)
(Log in to post comments)
The new file systems: Posted Nov 30, 2006 21:37 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] More options to choose from means less test coverage for every single combination of the options. I'd rather stick with the defaults.Safety of data is obtained through procedures, not through clever coding. Most data losses are caused by improper procedures (such as missing backups or security breaches) rather than by the filesystem software failures. Consider using well tested code as part of the procedure. I'm very interested in the precise timestamps, but they are not in 2.6.19 yet.
|
|||||||||||||