lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 4 Jan 2009 21:00:03 -0800 (PST)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
	Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>,
	Duane Griffin <duaneg@...da.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	Martin MOKREJŠ 
	<mmokrejs@...osome.natur.cuni.cz>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
	rdunlap@...otime.net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: document ext3 requirements

On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Rob Landley wrote:

> On Sunday 04 January 2009 17:30:52 Theodore Tso wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 11:40:52PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Not neccessarily.
>>>
>>> If I have a bit of precious data and lot of junk on the card, I want
>>> to copy out the precious data before the card dies. Reading the whole
>>> media may just take too long.
>>>
>>> That's probably very true for rotating harddrives after headcrash...
>>
>> For a small amount data, maybe; but the number of seeks is often far
>> more destructive than the amount of time the disk is spinning.  And in
>> practice, what generally happens is the user starts looking around to
>> make sure there wasn't anything else on the disk worth saving, and now
>> data is getting copied off based on human reaction time.  So that's
>> why I normally advise users that doing a full image copy of the disk
>> is much better than, say, "cp -r /home/luser /backup", or cd'ing
>> around a filesystem hierarchy and trying to save files one by one.
>
> That would be true if the disk hardware wasn't doing a gazillion retries to
> read a bad sector internally (taking 5 seconds to come back and report
> failure), and then the darn scsi layer added another gazillion retries on top
> of that, and the two multiply together to make it so slow that that when you
> leave the thing copying the disk overnight it's STILL not done 24 hours later.
> Going in and cherry picking individual files looks kind of appealing in that
> situation.

I've also had cases where one particular spot on the drive is bad. any 
attempt to read that sector fails and causes the drive to error out until 
a reboot. grabbing individual files I could skip the file(s) in the 
affected portion and retreive everything else on the drive (or in some 
cases raid array with multiple failures)

David Lang
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ