From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: What happened to data=guarded? Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:42:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20090810164205.GC1505@ucw.cz> References: <1249934623-15939-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <200908111535.37927.elendil@planet.nl> <20090811133721.GD29224@think> <200908111654.38217.elendil@planet.nl> <878whqgyid.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20090811185703.GQ1756@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Theodore Tso , Andi Kleen , Frans Pop , Chris Mason , jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux- Return-path: Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:41643 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754450AbZHKVCQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:02:16 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090811185703.GQ1756@mit.edu> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue 2009-08-11 14:57:03, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 05:29:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Good to hear. I've so far stayed with data=ordered as I think I'd prefer > > > data=guarded over data=writeback. I'll certainly give it a try when it's > > > available. > > > > Same here. data=writeback already cost me a few files after crashes here :/ > > What sort of files were you losing? I don't know if we can improve > the implied flush hueristics, but we should at least try to see if we > do something about it. IIRC... the flush heuristics invoke async flush, so you can still lose data if you are unlucky, no? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html