Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030638AbWHIKPe (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 06:15:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030640AbWHIKPe (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 06:15:34 -0400 Received: from thebsh.namesys.com ([212.16.7.65]:65251 "HELO thebsh.namesys.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1030638AbWHIKP2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 06:15:28 -0400 Message-ID: <44D9A7AE.5060405@namesys.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:15:26 -0600 From: Hans Reiser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060417 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Machek CC: David Masover , "Horst H. von Brand" , Bernd Schubert , reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Jan-Benedict Glaw , Clay Barnes , Rudy Zijlstra , Adrian Ulrich , ipso@snappymail.ca, lkml@lpbproductions.com, jeff@garzik.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion References: <200608011428.k71ESIuv007094@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl> <44CF87E6.1050004@slaphack.com> <20060806225912.GC4205@ucw.cz> <44D99ED9.1030003@namesys.com> <20060809094813.GE3308@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20060809094813.GE3308@elf.ucw.cz> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1082 Lines: 36 Pavel Machek wrote: >On Wed 2006-08-09 02:37:45, Hans Reiser wrote: > > >>Pavel Machek wrote: >> >> >> >>>Yes, I'm afraid redundancy/checksums kill write speed, >>> >>> >>> >>they kill write speed to cache, but not to disk.... our compression >>plugin is faster than the uncompressed plugin..... >> >> > >Yes, you can get clever. But your compression plugin also means that >single bit error means whole block is lost, so there _is_ speed >vs. stability-against-hw-problems. > >But you are right that compression will catch same class of errors >checksums will, so that it is probably good thing w.r.t. stability. > > Pavel > > So we need to use ecc not checksums if we want to increase reliability. Edward, can you comment in more detail regarding your views and the performance issues for ecc that you see? - 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/