Re: http://www.namesys.com/snapshots/2004.08.03-internal.testing/

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Vitaly Fertman wrote:

>On Tuesday 03 August 2004 17:58, Markus Törnqvist wrote:
>  
>
>>On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 05:50:00PM +0400, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>No kernel patch is needed for the disk format change, however fsck may
>>>report about some corruptions on an existent fs if a block was allocated
>>>for some data and has become a backup one. Fsck.reiser4 --build-fs is
>>>able to fix it of course, although the data in these blocks are lost then.
>>>      
>>>
These blocks refers to blocks that were used by files and are now backup 
super blocks?  These blocks could be critical database files, etc.?

If yes, then please pull this off our website until you come up with a 
scheme that I am sure will not create more user problems than it solves, 
on average.

>>What kind of probabilities and amounts of data are we talking about?
>>    
>>
>
>The first gig has 22 backup blocks and they are distributed expotentially.
>The first backup copy was probably almost always used for other needs.
>
>  
>