1 |
On Oct 26, 2012 3:36 AM, "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
4 |
> <SNIP> |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > Nice find, thanks. But the update to that article which gave a link to |
7 |
Theo |
8 |
> > T'so email is quite unnerving. He said that his initial hypothesis had |
9 |
not |
10 |
> > been proven and he himself is back in the dark. |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > Not much confidence in ext4 for the time being for me. Back to |
13 |
reiserfs? ;-) |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > Rgds, |
16 |
> > -- |
17 |
> |
18 |
> I'm not an ext4 user (it's too new!) and therefore unaffected by any |
19 |
> of this personally. However I do read lkml and have been following the |
20 |
> thread since it started. This bug, if indeed in the end it's even |
21 |
> determined to be a bug, is apparently pretty hard to hit. The downside |
22 |
> is that if you did hit it the effects can be pretty devastating. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> I'd suggest folks consider going through the thread and not |
25 |
> overreacting to the masking of new kernels or stuff posted on Phoronix |
26 |
> or slashdot. It's good that the info is out there so people can make |
27 |
> informed decisions, but one of the downsides of having all the info is |
28 |
> the potential for people to overreact. Even with a ;-) dumping ext4 |
29 |
> for Reiserfs might be in that camp. :-) |
30 |
> |
31 |
> Cheers, |
32 |
> Mark |
33 |
> |
34 |
|
35 |
LoL... I was just joking about dumping ext4. I still am going to use ext4, |
36 |
but I will ratchet up the backup schedule, and anyone thinking of |
37 |
restarting a Linux server in my office before first performing a full |
38 |
backup, will be severely reprimanded. |
39 |
|
40 |
(I *do* use ReiserFS, though. Especially for portage's tmp) |
41 |
|
42 |
Rgds, |
43 |
-- |