Apparently, though unproven, at 22:12 on Friday 31 December 2010, Dale did opine thusly:
> Hi, > > I'm planning to build a rig like mine for my brother before to long. I > know there are lots of opinions on the net but want some personal > experience information on this. My brother does not have a UPS. I may > can talk him into getting one but not sure. What is a good file system > that recovers well from a improper shutdown? I use ext2, ext3 and > reiserfs here but never had a power problem, except when hal broke my > stuff. I know XFS is not good for this already from my own personal > experience. > > Does anyone here have any personal experience on this? Just a 'I use > this and had a power failure and it powered up fine with no data loss' > would be nice. If this happened a lot and still worked, that would be > even better. > > I'm not looking to start a turf war. This will be a plain old desktop > so it doesn't need a fancy file system, just one that recovers from a > power failure. Down here we have Africa power. Africa power makes post-Katrina power look tame. Total corruptions in 5 years with reiserfs-3.6 and NO ups in that environment = zero. I can't fairly comment on ext[234] as I don't have the same length of experience with them. From what other commentators have said elsewhere it looks like with optimum settings and tweaks they can be just as good as I got from reiser, but that's just hearsay from me. My gut feel on this is that any modern fs will be built to be able to tolerate blackouts - it's almost a requirement these days. So it's likely a 6 and half- dozen question in reality. Except XFS as you know, but that's a special case (aggressive caching virtually requires a UPS or guaranteed no-downtime power) -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
