Re: scary ext2 filesystem question

Mirian Crzig Lennox (mirian@xensei.com)
26 Dec 1998 03:08:45 -0500

o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s (david parsons) writes:
> >Obviously, if [any] computer system crashes, bad things can happen.
> >That was not my point of confusion; rather, I was bewildered because
> >the author seemed to be implying that these kinds of problems could
> >occur *even during normal filesystem operation*.
>
> The comment about fsck failing was, at least to me, pretty clear
> indication that the author was talking about what happens during
> a crash.

I agree that that would make the most sense, but that's *not* what the
author wrote:

"Although the file system consistency check would ensure that the file
system is consistent, the lack of ordering on operations can lead to
confused applications or, even worse, crashing applications because of
the inconsistencies in the order of modifications to the file system."

He's talking about events *leading up to* a crash (after fsck has
succeeded).

> >I'm inclined to agree, especially since elsewhere he refers to ext2 as
> >"the fast and unsafe grandchild" of FFS.
>
> I don't know if it's a grandchild of FFS, but it is a little bit
> less safe theoretically

Very very extreeeeeeemely marginally less safe, maybe... and even then
there's much room for debate -- FFS didn't get its nickname "Fast n'
Loose Filesystem" for nothing. :)

-- 
Mirian Crzig Lennox                                Systems Anarchist
          "There's a New World Order coming every minute.
                      Make mine extra cheese."


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/