[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <478FE22D.9030907@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:18:05 -0500
From: Ric Wheeler <ric@....com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com>,
Bryan Henderson <hbryan@...ibm.com>,
Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
David Chinner <dgc@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Valerie Henson <val.henson@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch] document ext3 requirements (was Re: [RFD] Incremental
fsck)
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:02:50PM -0500, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>> Have you observed that in the wild? A former engineer of a disk drive
>> company suggests to me that the capacitors on the board provide enough
>> power to complete the last sector, even to park the head.
>>
Even if true (which I doubt), this is not implemented.
A modern drive can have 16-32 MB of write cache. Worst case, those
sectors are not sequential which implies lots of head movement.
>
> The problem isn't with the disk drive; it's from the DRAM, which tend
> to be much more voltage sensitive than the hard drives --- so it's
> quite likely that you could end up DMA'ing garbage from the memory.
> In fact the fact that the disk drives lasts longer due to capacitors
> on the board, rotational inertia of the platters, etc., is part of the
> problem.
I can tell you directly that when you drop power to a drive, you will
lose write cache data if the write cache is enabled. With barriers
enabled, our testing shows that file systems survive power failures
which routinely caused corruption without them ;-)
ric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists