On Oct 26, 2012 3:36 AM, "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> <SNIP>
> >
> > Nice find, thanks. But the update to that article which gave a link to
Theo
> > T'so email is quite unnerving. He said that his initial hypothesis had
not
> > been proven and he himself is back in the dark.
> >
> > Not much confidence in ext4 for the time being for me. Back to
reiserfs? ;-)
> >
> > Rgds,
> > --
>
> I'm not an ext4 user (it's too new!) and therefore unaffected by any
> of this personally. However I do read lkml and have been following the
> thread since it started. This bug, if indeed in the end it's even
> determined to be a bug, is apparently pretty hard to hit. The downside
> is that if you did hit it the effects can be pretty devastating.
>
> I'd suggest folks consider going through the thread and not
> overreacting to the masking of new kernels or stuff posted on Phoronix
> or slashdot. It's good that the info is out there so people can make
> informed decisions, but one of the downsides of having all the info is
> the potential for people to overreact. Even with a ;-) dumping ext4
> for Reiserfs might be in that camp. :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>

LoL... I was just joking about dumping ext4. I still am going to use ext4,
but I will ratchet up the backup schedule, and anyone thinking of
restarting a Linux server in my office before first performing a full
backup, will be severely reprimanded.

(I *do* use ReiserFS, though. Especially for portage's tmp)

Rgds,
--