[LUNI] file system limitations

[Martin Maney]

On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:50:00AM -0500, Jirsa, Jeff wrote:
> If you are going to use ext2, then you better have a UPS connected to 
> the box at times!

Okay, let's take off the kid gloves: if it doesn't have ECC protecting
the memory and a UPS with working autoshutdown, then it's not a serious
machine and what does it matter what filesystem it uses?  <wink>

> IMHO, I would feel a lot safer with ext3.  The couple of times that I
> had to reboot because of power failures made me glad I chose ext3
> over ext2; every time the drive recovered without errors. No fsck
> required.

You do understand that unless you're using the mode in which it
journals both data as well as metadata (which causes a performance hit
in many, although not all, cases) the journalling protects your data
about as well as fscking - it's just faster to reboot.  Right?

FWIW, I've been using ext3 by default on the machines I've been setting
up this fall, and trying reiserfs for a few filesystems where I expect
its advantages to be particularly relevant - that news spool parititon,
for example.  So far they're all working as expected.

-- 
Passport brilliantly combines the kludgey and unstable nature of NIS+
with the insecurity of the trusted hosts concept to produce
a nine-step process with obvious opportunities for
security and other abuses.  -- Paul Murphy