From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Abhishek Rai <abhishekrai@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rohitseth@google.com,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [CALL FOR TESTING] Make Ext3 fsck way faster [2.6.24-rc6 -mm patch]
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 03:04:41 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080115030441.a0270609.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080114163412.83a8b18d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
I'm wondering about the real value of this change, really.
In any decent environment, people will fsck their ext3 filesystems during
planned downtime, and the benefit of reducing that downtime from 6
hours/machine to 2 hours/machine is probably fairly small, given that there
is no service interruption. (The same applies to desktops and laptops).
Sure, the benefit is not *zero*, but it's small. Much less than it would
be with ext2. I mean, the "avoid unplanned fscks" feature is the whole
reason why ext3 has journalling (and boy is that feature expensive during
normal operation).
So... it's unobvious that the benefit of this feature is worth its risks
and costs?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-15 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200801140839.01986.abhishekrai@google.com>
2008-01-15 0:34 ` [CALL FOR TESTING] Make Ext3 fsck way faster [2.6.24-rc6 -mm patch] Andrew Morton
2008-01-15 11:04 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-01-15 13:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-01-15 13:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-01-15 15:28 ` Theodore Tso
2008-01-17 12:47 ` Abhishek Rai
2008-01-20 4:10 ` Daniel Phillips
2008-01-21 2:51 ` Theodore Tso
2008-01-24 19:04 ` Daniel Phillips
2008-01-15 15:09 ` Ric Wheeler
2008-01-16 5:08 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-16 4:25 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-17 11:36 ` Andreas Dilger
2008-01-20 3:55 ` Daniel Phillips
2008-01-23 9:12 Abhishek Rai
2008-01-24 7:49 ` Andrew Morton
2008-01-24 13:14 ` Abhishek Rai
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=20080115030441.a0270609.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=abhishekrai@google.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rohitseth@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox