linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Richard Moser <nigelenki@comcast.net>
To: Diego Calleja <diegocg@gmail.com>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: soft update vs journaling?
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 20:00:18 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43D42AA2.6040106@comcast.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060122205039.e8842bae.diegocg@gmail.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Sun, 22 Jan 2006 04:31:44 -0500,
> Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> escribió:
> 
> 
> 
>>One major downside with Soft Updates that you haven't mentioned in
>>your note, is that the amount of complexity it adds to the filesystem
>>is tremendous; the filesystem has to keep track of a very complex
>>state machinery, with knowledge of about the ordering constraints of
>>each change to the filesystem and how to "back out" parts of the
>>change when that becomes necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> And FreeBSD is implementing journaling for UFS and getting rid of 
> softupdates [1]. While this not proves that softupdates is "a bad idea",
> i think this proves why the added sofupdates complexity doesn't seem
> to pay off in the real world. 
> 

Yeah, the huge TB fsck thing became a problem.  I wonder still if it'd
be useful for small vfat file systems (floppies, usb drives); nobody has
led me to believe it's definitely feasible to not corrupt meta-data in
this way.

I guess journaling is looking a lot better. :)

> [1]: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2004-December/009261.html
> 
> "4.  Journaled filesystem.  While we can debate the merits of speed and
> data integrety of journalling vs. softupdates, the simple fact remains
> that softupdates still requires a fsck run on recovery, and the
> multi-terabyte filesystems that are possible these days make fsck a very
> long and unpleasant experience, even with bg-fsck.  There was work at
> some point at RPI to add journaling to UFS, but there hasn't been much
> status on that in a long time.  There have also been proposals and
> works-in-progress to port JFS, ReiserFS, and XFS.  Some of these efforts
> are still alive, but they need to be seen through to completion"
> 

- --
All content of all messages exchanged herein are left in the
Public Domain, unless otherwise explicitly stated.

    Creative brains are a valuable, limited resource. They shouldn't be
    wasted on re-inventing the wheel when there are so many fascinating
    new problems waiting out there.
                                                 -- Eric Steven Raymond
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD1CqhhDd4aOud5P8RAjvDAJ0W9pcNQ31v0RWSSIGVitnSpfvReQCdHBah
usgY72whnDcCwgshpVFW02o=
=Px/i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-01-23  1:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-22  6:42 soft update vs journaling? John Richard Moser
2006-01-22  8:51 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-22 18:40   ` John Richard Moser
2006-01-22 19:05   ` Adrian Bunk
2006-01-22 19:08     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-01-22 19:25       ` Adrian Bunk
2006-01-24  2:33       ` Jörn Engel
2006-01-22  9:31 ` Theodore Ts'o
2006-01-22 18:54   ` John Richard Moser
2006-01-22 21:02     ` Theodore Ts'o
2006-01-22 22:44       ` Kyle Moffett
2006-01-23  7:24         ` Theodore Ts'o
2006-01-23 13:31           ` Mitchell Blank Jr
2006-01-23 13:33           ` Kyle Moffett
2006-01-23 13:52             ` Antonio Vargas
2006-01-23 16:48               ` Linux VFS architecture questions Kyle Moffett
2006-01-23 17:00                 ` Pekka Enberg
2006-01-23 17:50                   ` Kyle Moffett
2006-01-23 17:54                     ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-01-23 20:48           ` soft update vs journaling? Folkert van Heusden
2006-01-23  1:02       ` John Richard Moser
2006-01-22 19:50   ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-22 20:39     ` Suleiman Souhlal
2006-01-22 20:50       ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-23  1:00     ` John Richard Moser [this message]
2006-01-23  1:09       ` Suleiman Souhlal
2006-01-23  2:09         ` John Richard Moser
2006-01-22 19:26 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2006-01-23  0:06   ` John Richard Moser
2006-01-23  5:32 ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-23 18:52   ` John Richard Moser
2006-01-23 19:32     ` Matthias Andree

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=43D42AA2.6040106@comcast.net \
    --to=nigelenki@comcast.net \
    --cc=diegocg@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).