| |||||||||||||
Only with a UPSOnly with a UPSPosted Sep 10, 2009 19:19 UTC (Thu) by ncm (subscriber, #165)In reply to: Only with a UPS by flewellyn Parent article: POSIX v. reality: A position on O_PONIES Back about 1998, a Windows user told me that, for him, Windows "hardly ever crashes". Further questioning revealed that he defined "crash" as "I have to re-install". Lockups, a multiple-daily event, didn't count. Generally, though, by "crash" we mean the system stops responding to events, and must be re-started; usually this is a software failure, although all manner of hardware faults can cause it. When these happen, the disk has plenty of time to drain its buffers. Usually the software fault has not caused any disk writes with crazy parameters. OS developers don't count power drops among crashes because those aren't their fault. That's commendable, because when they say "crash" they mean something they accept responsibility for.
(Log in to post comments)
Only with a UPS Posted Sep 10, 2009 22:20 UTC (Thu) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link]
Ah, that makes sense.
Handling power drops, to me, seems to be a matter of impossibility, at least as long as disks lie about when writes actually complete.
|
|||||||||||||