On 24/04/2013 12:17, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:10:56 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > >>> "Some directory operations (including unlink(2)) are not synchronous >>> on ReiserFS, which can result in data corruption with applications >>> relying heavily on file-based locks (such as mail transfer agents >>> qmail[9] and Postfix[10]) if the machine halts before it has >>> synchronized the disk." >>> >>> So I can lose stuff if the computer crashes. I don't see that as a >>> specific problem with MTAs. although they do tend to have a lot of >>> file throughput. On the other hand, I think the fact that maildir >>> uses so many files is one of the reasons I went with ResierFS in the >>> first place, running out of inodes on a mail server would not be my >>> idea of fun. >> >> I solve that problem for me in the obvious way: >> >> I pay less attention to choice of filesystem and more attention on >> rigging systems that don't crash! > > Maybe that's why I never hit this bug, I don't recall my mail server ever > crashing. > > If this mail does not arrive intact, I spoke too so^%£$£"
Postfix doesn't crash (for the everyday human definition of "doesn't"). Here's my pair of MTAs: $ uptime 12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20, 0.31 $ uptime 12:24PM up 1925 days, 20:30, 4 users, load averages: 0.90, 0.75, 0.84 Those two just keep on accepting and dealing with mail, they do that a million times a day and according to uptime have been doing it for 10 years. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
