Slower performance with ext4
Mark Kirkwood
markir at paradise.net.nz
Mon Nov 2 08:01:27 UTC 2009
Christopher Chan wrote:
>
> No. This is not an insult. You are doing others a disservice by spouting
> myths. I am now calling your bluff on how different filesystems behave
> in regards to fsync requests and challenge you to get an authoritative
> answer from any of the developers of XFS, JFS, ext(x) that contradicts
> what I has said.
>
>
No bluff, just no alarmist hype either.
>
> Did you miss my remarks about when you are not using hardware raid + bbu
> cache? You do know that such hardware covers for any short comings in
> filesystems with regards to data consistency and that that is the reason
> for the existence of such hardware?
>
>
It is (or should be) widely known that cheap (s)ata drives do not honor
fsync requests (*many* google links).
>
>
> A server motherboard that uses ECC RAM and SAS/SCSI hard drives and
> software raid will suffer the same results. You have been spouting
> inaccurate information about filesystem behaviour that will affect those
> who do not have the means to purchase your uber hardware that covers for
> any filesystem's shortcomings with respects to data integrity. Others
> make do with less by having a full understanding of the behaviour of the
> operating systems they run whether it is FreeBSD and softupdates or
> Linux and its various filesystems that support journaling. You can get
> the same data integrity on lesser hardware (motherboards supporting
> ECC-RAM are no longer the realm of 'server' grade motherboards) if
> configured properly.
>
>
No it will not. I've been a Freebsd server admin for the last 10 years -
no data loss due to power failure on any of my servers - because I've
used reliable hardware that honors fsync.
regards
Mark
More information about the ubuntu-users
mailing list