From: Simon Kirby Subject: Re: EXT3 way too happy with write errors Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 18:15:16 -0800 Message-ID: <20090103021516.GE9995@hostway.ca> References: <20081015002256.GD25662@hostway.ca> <20081218170714.GA6797@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20081218171825.GD20515@hostway.ca> <20081218172759.GE13580@duck.suse.cz> <20081218174921.GF20515@hostway.ca> <532480950812181029k1baf8264y82fb6d9760fe05f8@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , Hidehiro Kawai , Mike Snitzer , Andreas Dilger , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Rubin Return-path: Received: from newpeace.netnation.com ([204.174.223.7]:50197 "EHLO peace.netnation.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757589AbZACCPW (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 21:15:22 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <532480950812181029k1baf8264y82fb6d9760fe05f8@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Simon Kirby wrote: > > Not aborting on data write error: User loses data. File system gets very > > confused. > > > > What am I missing? > > I can think of certain situations when companies may care about > getting most of the data to disk and clean it up later. > Datacenters may be replicating the data to many spindles and may > sometimes care about throughput as much as possible. So lossy data > could be preferred to complete data. > > Not saying this is always preferred but I can see a use case. Ok, fine, in this case they might know what they are doing. Still, this is not reason enough to default the case in point... ? :) Simon-