Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:37:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:36:58 -0500 Received: from relay02.cablecom.net ([62.2.33.102]:40712 "EHLO relay02.cablecom.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:36:42 -0500 Message-ID: <3AB689CC.FE5A8AAB@bluewin.ch> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 23:35:55 +0100 From: Otto Wyss Reply-To: otto.wyss@bluewin.ch X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: de,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Linux should better cope with power failure Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeremy Jackson wrote: > > Brian Gerst wrote: > > > "Richard B. Johnson" wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Otto Wyss wrote: > > > > > > > Lately I had an USB failure, leaving me without any access to my system [..] > > > Unix and other such variants have what's called a Virtual File System > > > (VFS). The idea behind this is to keep as much recently-used file stuff > > > in memory so that the system can be as fast as if you used a RAM disk > > > instead of real physical (slow) hard disks. If you can't cope with this, > > > use DOS. > > > > At the very least the disk should be consistent with memory. If the > > dirty pages aren't written back to the disk (but not necessarily removed > > from memory) after a reasonable idle period, then there is room for > > improvement. > > They are. If you leave your machine one for a minute or so (probably less is ok, > but I don't know) the kernel will flush dirty buffers... fsck will complain, but the > file's There was at least 15min I waited without doing anything (how could I without any imput device). I was editing a file with vim and the usual bunch of demons where running mostly doing nothing. I don't know if all the complains from fsck where due to open files or dirty cache pages. I wouldn't complain if there was any heavy activity but there was allmost none. > *data* blocks will be on the disk. There are way more reasons that this is a silly > and annoying thread. You should read more about things like > asynchronous/synchronous filesystems, > lazy-write cacheing, etc, etc,. If you know how to write software and/or configure > your system, > you can avoid all of these problems. Or use a journaling filesystem ext3/xfs, etc. > But I tire of this... So in real live you would propose to put fences and nets everywhere to prevent children from possibly falling in abyses? O. Wyss - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/