From: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Introduce new mount option to disable tree log replay
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 15:29:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56673DA5.9030607@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1449602402.6649.6.camel@scientia.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2470 bytes --]
On 2015-12-08 14:20, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-12-08 at 07:15 -0500, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
>> Despite this, it really isn't a widely known or well documented
>> behavior
>> outside of developers, forensic specialists, and people who have had
>> to
>> deal with the implications it has on data recovery. There really
>> isn't
>> any way that the user would know about it without being explicitly
>> told,
>> and it's something that can have a serious impact on being able to
>> recover a broken filesystem. TBH, I really feel that _every_
>> filesystem's documentation should have something about how to make it
>> mount truly read-only, even if it's just a reference to how to mark
>> the
>> block device read-only.
> Exactly what I've meant.
>
> And the developers here, should definitely consider that every normal
> end-user, may easily assume the role of e.g. a forensics specialist
> (especially with btrfs ;-) ), when recovery in case of corruptions is
> tried.
>
>
> I don't think that "it has always been improperly documented" (i.e. the
> "ro" option) is a good excuse to continue doing it that way =)
Agreed, 'but it's always been that way' is never a valid argument, and
the fact that people who have been working on UNIX for decades know it
doesn't mean that it's something that people will just inherently know.
The only reason it was that way to begin with is because it was
assumed that everyone dealing with computers had a huge amount of domain
specific knowledge of them (this was a valid assumption back in 1970, it
hasn't been a valid assumption since at least 1990).
Stuff that seems obvious to people who have been working on it for years
isn't necessarily obvious to people who have limited experience with it
(I recently had to explain to a friend who had almost no networking
background how IP addresses are just an abstraction for MAC addresses,
and how it's not possible to block WiFi access based on an IP address;
it took me three tries and eventually making the analogy of street
addresses being an abstraction for geographical coordinates before he
finally got it).
TBH, the only reason I knew about this rather annoying detail of
filesystem implementation before using BTRFS is because of dealing with
shared storage on VM's (that was an interesting week of debugging and
restoring backups before I finally figured out what was going on).
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 3019 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-08 20:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-07 6:06 [PATCH] btrfs: Introduce new mount option to disable tree log replay Qu Wenruo
2015-12-07 15:38 ` Chandan Rajendra
2015-12-07 23:51 ` Qu Wenruo
2015-12-07 16:27 ` Eric Sandeen
2015-12-07 16:52 ` Chandan Rajendra
2015-12-07 17:29 ` Eric Sandeen
2015-12-07 20:54 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-07 23:06 ` Eric Sandeen
2015-12-08 0:00 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-08 12:15 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-12-08 19:20 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-08 20:29 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn [this message]
2015-12-07 16:36 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-12-08 6:08 ` Qu Wenruo
2015-12-08 12:16 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56673DA5.9030607@gmail.com \
--to=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=calestyo@scientia.net \
--cc=chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.