Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: USB crucial file recovery
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 22:12:22
Message-Id: 57C604BF.8040700@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: USB crucial file recovery by Rich Freeman
1 Am 30.08.2016 um 23:59 schrieb Rich Freeman:
2 > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
3 > <volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> wrote:
4 >> the journal does not add any data integrity benefits at all. It just
5 >> makes it more likely that the fs is in a sane state if there is a crash.
6 >> Likely. Not a guarantee. Your data? No one cares.
7 >>
8 > That depends on the mode of operation. In journal=data I believe
9 > everything gets written twice, which should make it fairly immune to
10 > most forms of corruption.
11
12 nope. Crash at the wrong time, data gone. FS hopefully sane.
13
14 >
15 > f2fs would also have this benefit. Data is not overwritten in-place
16 > in a log-based filesystem; they're essentially journaled by their
17 > design (actually, they're basically what you get if you ditch the
18 > regular part of the filesystem and keep nothing but the journal).
19 >
20 >> If you want an fs that cares about your data: zfs.
21 >>
22 > I won't argue that the COW filesystems have better data security
23 > features. It will be nice when they're stable in the main kernel.
24 >
25
26 it is not so much about cow, but integrity checks all the way from the
27 moment the cpu spends some cycles on it. Caught some silent file
28 corruptions that way. Switched to ECC ram and never saw them again.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: USB crucial file recovery Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>