[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080521193633.GA26780@shareable.org>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 20:36:33 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] (RESEND) ext3[34] barrier changes
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:03:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > afaik there is no need to enable this feature if the machine (actually
> > the disks) are on a UPS, yes?
>
> Yes, as long as you're confident that there won't be a kernel
> bug/regression causing a lockup while the server is under severe
> memory pressure while doing lots of fsync's, file creations, renames,
> etc. And as long as your 100% confident that UPS's will never fail,
> janitors will never accidentally hit the Emergency Power Office
Can a kernel lockup cause this kind of corruption?
Will a system reboot wipe the disk's write cache?
I had imagined only power loss would prevent the disk from
writing it's cache eventually; is that wrong?
-- Jamie
--
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