xfsprogs

[Alma J Wetzker]

Bruce Marshall wrote:
> On Thursday 12 August 2004 10:53 am, Kurt Wall wrote:
> 
>>In a 0.8K blaze of typing glory, M.W. Chang wrote:
>>
>>>>What are you trying to fix?  I don't think journaling file systems need
>>>>fsck.
>>>
>>>I have once had ext3 corruption problem with my harddisk,
>>>demanding manual intervention. SO I thought the same thing
>>>MIGHT happen to xfs. I am not sure how superior xfs could be
>>>when compared to ext3.
>>
>>Significantly superior. In the two years I've been running XFS, I've lost
>>exactly *no* data.
>>
>>
>>>thanks. I was just curious about the strange behaviour of fsck.xfs. :)
>>
>>Yup.
>>
>>KUrt
> 
> 
> I would like to say the same, Kurt, and I also have been running XFS for about 
> two years.   But recently, in a T-storm, the power took about a 3 sec hit and 
> my wife's machine went down.  The next day, she couldn't open Kmail and 
> mozilla was all screwed up.  It had all of my bookmarks and none of hers and 
> other things were weird.  (and I don't use her machine but I do have a login 
> on it)
> 
> Not to say this couldn't happen with any FS but it *can* happen to XFS.  I 
> guess XFS does a lot of memory caching of data and if you catch it at just 
> the wrong time, it could well cause problems...

A UPS can solve most of those problems.  I am not sure if blaming the *fs is 
legitimate here.  Mozilla and several kde apps cache data and config info at 
the application level, the *fs never gets a chance to save it in an immediate 
power down situation.  (Not sure about gnome, don't use it often.)

     -- Alma