Comment 51 for bug 317781

Theodore Ts'o (tytso) wrote :


One more thought. You say, "You never know when your MB, CPU, PS" may bite the dust. Sure, but you also never know when your RAID controller will bite the dust and start writing data blocks whenver it's supposed to be reading from the RAID (yes, we had an Octel voice mailbox server fail in just that way at MIT once). And you never know when a hard drive will fail. So if you have those sorts of very high levels of reliability requirements, then you will probably be disappointed with any commodity hardware solution. I can direct you to an IBM salesperson who will be very happy to sell you an IBM mainframe, however.

At the end of day, the best we can do about surviving unplanned crashes in the absence of formal fsync() requests, is best efforts. This is true for all file systems, although it is true that the slowest file systems may be more robust. The patches is the best I can do without completely sacrificing performance; but hey, if it's not good enough for you, you're free to keep using ext3.