Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible

From: Rob Landley
Date: Sat Aug 29 2009 - 16:22:22 EST

On Saturday 29 August 2009 05:05:58 Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2009-08-28 07:49:38, david@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Aug 2009, Rob Landley wrote:
> >> Pavel's response was to attempt to document this. Not that journaling
> >> is _bad_, but that it doesn't protect against this class of problem.
> >
> > I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the statement that journaling
> > doesn't protect against this class of problems, but Pavel's statements
> > didn't say that. he stated that ext3 is more dangerous than ext2.
> Well, if you use 'common' fsck policy, ext3 _is_ more dangerous.

The filesystem itself isn't more dangerous, but it may provide a false sense of
security when used on storage devices it wasn't designed for.

Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at