| |||||||||||||
Better than POSIX?Better than POSIX?Posted Mar 18, 2009 2:40 UTC (Wed) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: Better than POSIX? by man_ls Parent article: Better than POSIX?
that 5 second window did leave you vulnerable to data corruption (in many ways). you just got lucky
(Log in to post comments)
Better than POSIX? Posted Mar 18, 2009 4:12 UTC (Wed) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link]
It wasn't really as bad as it sounds. ext3 also doesn't have delayed allocation. Someone on the Ubuntu bug list posted some testcases and really couldn't make ext3 fail at all. (ext4 fell flat.)
Better than POSIX? Posted Mar 18, 2009 7:28 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] I know my data is vulnerable in many ways. I would just like the most common cases to be addressed. It is not luck. According to the discussions, everyone who has had a crash with (first) XFS or (now) ext4 is getting inconsistent states, while no heavy-duty ext3 users have reportedly seen this kind of corruption. Maybe others, yes, but no zero-length files -- which is the issue under discussion.
|
|||||||||||||