Can ext3 filesystem corrupt due to power failure
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: NYC LOCAL: Tuesday 19 January 2010 Perl Seminar NY: Kristina Chodorow on MongoDB
Next: photo display engine for Linux: alternatives to picassa flickr etc.
From: notbob on 19 Jan 2010 13:40 On 2010-01-19, The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > any fil4system can. It's been my experience that ext3 is more robust than that murder-yer-wife filesystem. After using --and losing-- more than one reiserfs under pwr failure conditions, ext3 works relatively well. nb
From: Aragorn on 19 Jan 2010 14:57 On Tuesday 19 January 2010 19:40 in comp.os.linux.misc, somebody identifying as notbob wrote... > On 2010-01-19, The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> any fil4system can. > > It's been my experience that ext3 is more robust than that > murder-yer-wife filesystem. After using --and losing-- more than one > reiserfs under pwr failure conditions, ext3 works relatively well. I personally prefer XFS, and some other people I know use JFS. Both are robust and time-tested journaled filesystems and perform very well. Yet it is advised - especially in the event of XFS - to connect your computer's power cable to a UPS, because XFS has a delayed "write to disk" routine for performance reasons. It heavily caches and buffers, and so in the event of a power failure, you might lose quite an amount data which had not been saved to disk yet. -- *Aragorn* (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
From: The Natural Philosopher on 19 Jan 2010 16:04 notbob wrote: > On 2010-01-19, The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> any fil4system can. > > It's been my experience that ext3 is more robust than that > murder-yer-wife filesystem. After using --and losing-- more than one > reiserfs under pwr failure conditions, ext3 works relatively well. > > nb Oh..sure reiserfs is a thalidomide child, that should never have gone to term
From: Rikishi42 on 19 Jan 2010 19:43 On 2010-01-19, notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: > > > On 2010-01-19, The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> any fil4system can. > > It's been my experience that ext3 is more robust than that > murder-yer-wife filesystem. After using --and losing-- more than one > reiserfs under pwr failure conditions, ext3 works relatively well. You don't really need a power failure for that. On my previous machine, I had 2 software-related machine crashes in just a few weeks. Each time, ReiserFS hung solid on reboot. And it's fsck wasn't really much help, neighter. Allways backup, kids. Allways. -- Any time things appear to be going better, you have overlooked something.
From: The Natural Philosopher on 20 Jan 2010 06:02
Rikishi42 wrote: > On 2010-01-19, notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: >> >> On 2010-01-19, The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> any fil4system can. >> It's been my experience that ext3 is more robust than that >> murder-yer-wife filesystem. After using --and losing-- more than one >> reiserfs under pwr failure conditions, ext3 works relatively well. > > You don't really need a power failure for that. > > On my previous machine, I had 2 software-related machine crashes in just a > few weeks. Each time, ReiserFS hung solid on reboot. And it's fsck wasn't > really much help, neighter. > > Allways backup, kids. Allways. > > And avoid reiserfs like the plague. > > |