public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
To: ReiserFS <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: precise characterization of ext3 atomicity
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:20:57 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F574A49.7040900@namesys.com> (raw)

Is it correct to say of ext3 that it guarantees and only guarantees 
atomicity of writes that do not cross page boundaries?

I am trying to define the difference between "Atomic Reiser4" and ext3, 
as it seems to be a frequently asked question, and I am thinking of 
saying something like:

    Reiser4 allows you to define a set of up to A separate arbitrary 
filesystem operations (where A by default is not allowed to exceed 64) 
that are to be committed to disk atomically.  Every individual 
filesystem operation is atomic without the need to specify it.

    By contrast, ext3 only guarantees the atomicity of a single write 
that does not span a page boundary, and it guarantees that its internal 
metadata will not be corrupted even if your applications data is 
corrupted after the crash.

-- 
Hans



             reply	other threads:[~2003-09-04 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-09-04 14:20 Hans Reiser [this message]
2003-09-04 15:55 ` precise characterization of ext3 atomicity Andrew Morton
2003-09-04 15:59   ` Hans Reiser
2003-09-04 16:12     ` Andrew Morton
2003-09-04 16:25       ` Hans Reiser
2003-09-04 18:15         ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 16:05           ` Antonio Vargas
2003-09-04 18:37           ` Hans Reiser
2003-09-04 19:12             ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 21:03               ` Hans Reiser
2003-09-04 19:28             ` Andreas Dilger
2003-09-04 21:32               ` Hans Reiser
2003-09-04 22:03                 ` Andreas Dilger
2003-09-05 13:47                   ` Chris Mason
2003-09-09 13:09                 ` Pavel Machek
2003-09-09 19:21                   ` Gábor Lénárt
2003-09-09 19:43                     ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 20:16   ` Daniel Phillips
2003-09-04 20:10     ` Andrew Morton
2003-09-04 21:08       ` Daniel Phillips
2003-09-04 21:39         ` Hans Reiser
2003-09-04 21:59           ` Daniel Phillips

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=3F574A49.7040900@namesys.com \
    --to=reiser@namesys.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=reiserfs-list@namesys.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