From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tokarev Subject: Re: RAID needs more to survive a power hit, different /boot layout for example (was Re: draft howto on making raids for surviving a disk crash) Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:52:10 +0300 Message-ID: <47A7188A.4070005@msgid.tls.msk.ru> References: <47A612BE.5050707@pobox.com> <47A623EE.4050305@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <47A62A17.70101@pobox.com> <47A6DA81.3030008@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <47A6EFCF.9080906@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <47A6EFCF.9080906@pobox.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Moshe Yudkowsky Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Moshe Yudkowsky wrote: [] > If I'm reading the man pages, Wikis, READMEs and mailing lists correctly > -- not necessarily the case -- the ext3 file system uses the equivalent > of data=journal as a default. ext3 defaults to data=ordered, not data=journal. ext2 doesn't have journal at all. > The question then becomes what data scheme to use with reiserfs on the I'd say don't use reiserfs in the first place ;) > Another way to phrase this: unless you're running data-center grade > hardware and have absolute confidence in your UPS, you should use > data=journal for reiserfs and perhaps avoid XFS entirely. By the way, even if you do have a good UPS, there should be some control program for it, to properly shut down your system when UPS loses the AC power. So far, I've seen no such programs... /mjt