Re: [PATCH] 2.4.10 improved reiserfs a lot, but could still be better

Matthias Andree (matthias.andree@stud.uni-dortmund.de)
Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:54:13 +0200


On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Alan Cox wrote:

> > Those drives should be blacklisted and rejected as soon as someone tries
> > to mount those pieces rw. Either the drive can make guarantees when a
> > write to permanent storage has COMPLETED (either by switching off the
> > cache or by a flush operation) or it belongs ripped out of the boxes and
> > stuffed down the throat of the idiot who built it.
>
> In which case you can choose between ancient ST-506 drives and SCSI

Sorry, a disk drive which makes no guarantees even after a flush, does
not belong in my boxen. I'd return it as broken the first day I figured
it did lazy write-back caching. No file system can be safe on such
disks.

-- 
Matthias Andree

"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/