The situation here, from a bird's eye view, is quite simple. If ext4, with real applications running in the real world, exhibits this behavior then ext4 and Linux, not necessarily in that order, are going to come to be considered unstable crap. This includes old abandoned FOSS code as well as proprietary code used by businesses that is not likely to get rewritten any time soon. The Linux and Ext4, and not the application developers, will take the fall. If the solution involves hurting Ext4 in the benchmarks, then so be it. If it means a little more fragmentation, so be it. I cannot believe that there is any question about this. If nodelalloc needs to be made the default, with a big warning slapped onto the option that enables delayed allocation, then so be it. It seems absolutely surreal to see extX devs debating whether an easily demonstrable and severe lack of data integrity might be worth it to get better benchmark numbers. (And it makes me start wondering how much I should trust ext4, in general.) I guess maybe they've just been obsessing so much on bechmark figures that they've totally lost perspective. Hopefully, it is just a temporary condition.