On Mon, 30 May 2005 08:17:00 +0200, Matthias Barremaecker said: > I did a bad block check and I have 10 bad blocks of 4096bytes on 1300Gig > and ... that is the reason reiserfs will not work anymore.
> I guess this sux. I rather have that the data on the bad blocks is just > corupted but the rest is accesseble. It all depends on which 10 blocks go bad. If it's a block that's allocated to a file, you lose the 4K or whatever that's in that block. If it's a block that an inode lives in, you're probably going to have the entire file evaporate. If it's a block that contains something even more important, you're going to have large sections of the file system evaporate. It's a tradeoff issue - how many times do you replicate metadata on the filesystem, against how well the file system deals with errors. The problem is that if you just say "let's have 2 copies of everything, just in case", it takes a lot more disk space to *store* 2 copies of the metadata. Also, your disk performance falls through the floor - most journalled filesystems have enough trouble making sure that *one* copy of things like the free list is on disk and consistent with the journal. Making 2 copies is going to probably triple your disk I/O and complicate matters a *lot* for fsck (if you crash and the two copies aren't consistent, which one do you believe?) That's why almost all filesystems designers just punt and assume that the media actually works, and suggest if your media might not be 100% reliable, that you use RAID or similar solutions....
pgpSnF34gSSOu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
