* Re: [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem?
2011-10-04 3:47 [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem? Pandu Poluan
@ 2011-10-04 4:25 ` Michael Mol
2011-10-04 4:34 ` Pandu Poluan
2011-10-04 4:27 ` Hilco Wijbenga
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Michael Mol @ 2011-10-04 4:25 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> Hello people!
>
> Now, I have the same question as this guy:
>
> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=66651
>
> I.e., what is the most robust filesystem for Linux?
>
> The box will be used as a gateway/firewall for a branch office, so I really
> couldn't care less about filesystem performance. But the utility power there
> is horrendous, so I need something that can shrug off a catastrophic power
> loss, and/or very fast fsck.
ISO9660? Read-only, error correction, and have logging go over the
network to something else.
(Well, ISO9660 isn't required; any read-only media with a read-only
filesystem would probably do.)
--
:wq
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem?
2011-10-04 4:25 ` Michael Mol
@ 2011-10-04 4:34 ` Pandu Poluan
2011-10-04 4:47 ` Canek Peláez Valdés
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Pandu Poluan @ 2011-10-04 4:34 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --]
On Oct 4, 2011 11:30 AM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> > Hello people!
> >
> > Now, I have the same question as this guy:
> >
> > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=66651
> >
> > I.e., what is the most robust filesystem for Linux?
> >
> > The box will be used as a gateway/firewall for a branch office, so I
really
> > couldn't care less about filesystem performance. But the utility power
there
> > is horrendous, so I need something that can shrug off a catastrophic
power
> > loss, and/or very fast fsck.
>
> ISO9660? Read-only, error correction, and have logging go over the
> network to something else.
>
> (Well, ISO9660 isn't required; any read-only media with a read-only
> filesystem would probably do.)
Indeed that thought occurred in my mind. But I still need to keep some logs,
and have read-write access to /etc
Rgds,
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1307 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem?
2011-10-04 4:34 ` Pandu Poluan
@ 2011-10-04 4:47 ` Canek Peláez Valdés
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Canek Peláez Valdés @ 2011-10-04 4:47 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>
> On Oct 4, 2011 11:30 AM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>> > Hello people!
>> >
>> > Now, I have the same question as this guy:
>> >
>> > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=66651
>> >
>> > I.e., what is the most robust filesystem for Linux?
>> >
>> > The box will be used as a gateway/firewall for a branch office, so I
>> > really
>> > couldn't care less about filesystem performance. But the utility power
>> > there
>> > is horrendous, so I need something that can shrug off a catastrophic
>> > power
>> > loss, and/or very fast fsck.
>>
>> ISO9660? Read-only, error correction, and have logging go over the
>> network to something else.
>>
>> (Well, ISO9660 isn't required; any read-only media with a read-only
>> filesystem would probably do.)
>
> Indeed that thought occurred in my mind. But I still need to keep some logs,
> and have read-write access to /etc
Set / to read-only and put /var in another partition. When you need to
modify /etc, you remount / rw, modify, and then remount rw. A a
gateway/firewall should not need config changes very often.
With a ro filesystem, it doesn't really matter what filesystem do you use.
Regards.
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem?
2011-10-04 3:47 [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem? Pandu Poluan
2011-10-04 4:25 ` Michael Mol
@ 2011-10-04 4:27 ` Hilco Wijbenga
2011-10-04 4:54 ` Michael Orlitzky
2011-10-04 5:23 ` Paul Hartman
3 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Hilco Wijbenga @ 2011-10-04 4:27 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On 3 October 2011 20:47, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> Hello people!
>
> Now, I have the same question as this guy:
>
> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=66651
>
> I.e., what is the most robust filesystem for Linux?
The *most* robust? Probably something seriously expensive from IBM or similar.
I'd go with ReiserFS or Ext3. Both are very good. I use ReiserFS
pretty much everywhere. No running-out-of-inode problems with ReiserFS
so I prefer it over Ext3.
> The box will be used as a gateway/firewall for a branch office, so I really
> couldn't care less about filesystem performance. But the utility power there
> is horrendous, so I need something that can shrug off a catastrophic power
> loss, and/or very fast fsck.
Then why not simply use a LiveCD like OpenWall? Unbreakable file
system as it's all read-only (or RAM). Can't beat read-only. :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem?
2011-10-04 3:47 [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem? Pandu Poluan
2011-10-04 4:25 ` Michael Mol
2011-10-04 4:27 ` Hilco Wijbenga
@ 2011-10-04 4:54 ` Michael Orlitzky
2011-10-04 5:23 ` Paul Hartman
3 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Michael Orlitzky @ 2011-10-04 4:54 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On 10/03/2011 11:47 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> Hello people!
>
> Now, I have the same question as this guy:
>
> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=66651
>
> I.e., what is the most robust filesystem for Linux?
>
> The box will be used as a gateway/firewall for a branch office, so I
> really couldn't care less about filesystem performance. But the utility
> power there is horrendous, so I need something that can shrug off a
> catastrophic power loss, and/or very fast fsck.
>
> I'd also appreciate any tips on mount options to further enhance robustness.
Journaling filesystems are as safe as you'll get on commodity hardware.
I would choose ext4 because I'm familiar with it, but I'm sure others
offer the same options. It's also got the fastest fsck that I'm aware of.
From `man tune2fs`:
journal_data
When the filesystem is mounted with journalling
enabled, all data (not just metadata) is committed into
the journal prior to being written into the main
filesystem.
block_validity
(I haven't used this, but spotted it in the man page)
The file system will be mounted with the block_validity
option enabled, which causes extra checks to be per‐
formed after reading or writing from the file system.
This prevents corrupted metadata blocks from causing
file system damage by overwriting parts of the inode
table or block group descriptors. This comes at the
cost of increased memory and CPU overhead, so it is
enabled only for debugging purposes. (This option is
currently only supported by the ext4 file system driver
in 2.6.35+ kernels.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem?
2011-10-04 3:47 [gentoo-user] What is the most error resistant filesystem? Pandu Poluan
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-04 4:54 ` Michael Orlitzky
@ 2011-10-04 5:23 ` Paul Hartman
2011-10-07 16:06 ` Diego Augusto Molina
3 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paul Hartman @ 2011-10-04 5:23 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> The box will be used as a gateway/firewall for a branch office, so I really
> couldn't care less about filesystem performance. But the utility power there
> is horrendous, so I need something that can shrug off a catastrophic power
> loss, and/or very fast fsck.
I've lost XFS and JFS filesystems in the past due to their failure to
recover after sudden power loss. Ext3/4 have not failed me (yet).
But my question is, why don't you use a UPS and monitoring software to
perform a proper (clean) shutdown when power's off and battery is
running low. Some UPS also support automatic power-on once things are
normal again, in case this is an unattended box that locals can't be
bothered with rebooting themselves.
I can think of making a complicated system with read-only boot media
(cd/dvd/mmc/whatever) which attempts recovery of important data (logs
created since last backup) to a spare partition, RAM drive or the
Internet, then repartitions & reinstalls itself to the harddrive and
restores the recovered data. Optionally downloading updated configs
from Internet. (think kiosk distros).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread