On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Zygo Blaxell <ce3g8jdj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:31:02PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: >> I'm curious as to whether +C has any effect on BTRFS's durability, too. > > I would expect it to be strictly equal to or worse than the CoW > durability. It would have all the same general filesystem bugs as btrfs, > plus extra bugs that are specific to the no-CoW btrfs code paths, and > you lose write ordering and btrfs data integrity and repair capabilities, > and you have to enable fsync and log tree replay and dodge the bugs. Interesting. systemd-journald now uses +C by default on journal files. I've had journals become corrupt, per its own journalctl --verify command, but so far it happens infrequently enough I haven't discovered the pattern - whether it's worse with +C. And it's even possible there are bugs in systemd-journald causing the problem. -- Chris Murphy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
