Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Jun 2008 11:19:11 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] jbd: strictly check for write errors on data buffers |
| |
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:19:25 +0200 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> On Tue 03-06-08 15:30:50, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:43:57 +0900 > > Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > In ordered mode, we should abort journaling when an I/O error has > > > occurred on a file data buffer in the committing transaction. > > > > Why should we do that? > I see two reasons: > 1) If fs below us is returning IO errors, we don't really know how severe > it is so it's safest to stop accepting writes. Also user notices the > problem early this way. I agree that with the growing size of disks and > thus probability of seeing IO error, we should probably think of something > cleverer than this but aborting seems better than just doing nothing. > > 2) If the IO error is just transient (i.e., link to NAS is disconnected for > a while), we would silently break ordering mode guarantees (user could be > able to see old / uninitialized data). >
Does any other filesystem driver turn the fs read-only on the first write-IO-error?
It seems like a big policy change to me. For a lot of applications it's effectively a complete outage and people might get a bit upset if this happens on the first blip from their NAS.
<waves vigorously at linux-ext4 people>
| |