On Fri 2009-09-04 07:49:34, Ric Wheeler wrote:
On 09/04/2009 03:44 AM, Rob Landley wrote:ext3 does not expect atomic write of 4K block, according to Ted. So
On Thursday 03 September 2009 09:14:43 jim owens wrote:The point of that post was that the failure that you and Pavel both
Rob Landley wrote:That's why I've mostly stopped bothering with this thread. I could respond to
I think he understands he was clueless too, that's why he investigatedSee, this is exactly the problem we have with all the proposed
the failure and wrote it up for posterity.
And Ric said do not stigmatize whole classes of A) devices, B) raid,I don't care what "Pavel says", so you can leave the ad hominem at the
and C) filesystems with "Pavel says...".
door, thanks.
documentation. The reader (you) did not get what the writer (me)
was trying to say. That does not say either of us was wrong in
what we thought was meant, simply that we did not communicate.
Ric Wheeler's latest (what does write barriers have to do with whether or not
a multi-sector stripe is guaranteed to be atomically updated during a panic or
power failure?) but there's just no point.
attribute to RAID and journalled fs happens whenever the storage cannot
promise to do atomic writes of a logical FS block (prevent torn
pages/split writes/etc). I gave a specific example of why this happens
even with simple, single disk systems.
no, it is not broken on single disk.
Would anyone (probably privately?) share the lwn link?The LWN article on the topic is out, and incomplete as it is I expect it's the
best documentation anybody will actually _read_.
Pavel