On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Kerin Millar <kerfra...@fastmail.co.uk>wrote:
> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Kerin >> Millar<kerfra...@fastmail.co.**uk<kerfra...@fastmail.co.uk>> >> wrote: >> >>> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Nikos Chantziaras<rea...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Kernels 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6 can result in severe data corruption if >>>>> you're >>>>> using the EXT4 filesystem: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.**php?page=news_item&px=MTIxNDQ<http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIxNDQ> >>>>> >>>>> This includes gentoo-sources. I hope the Gentoo developers are on top >>>>> of >>>>> this. In the meantime, avoid doing reboots after too short an uptime. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Doesn't seem to be that serious: >>>> >>>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/**117091380454742934025/posts/**Wcc5tMiCgq7<https://plus.google.com/u/0/117091380454742934025/posts/Wcc5tMiCgq7> >>>> >>> >>> Might I enquire as to the manner in which this comment impartially >>> establishes that the consequences of the bug upon those affected is not >>> serious? >>> >> >> Oh, and about "impartiality"; this is a technical issue, not a >> philosophical one. I will always trust the expert's opinion over >> almost everyone's else. >> >> > The comment you linked to was fairly bereft of technical content, other > than to assert that the circumstances under which the bug triggers are so > limited that there is no general cause for concern. Given that (a) the > investigation chronicled by the lkml thread remains ongoing (b) a remedy > has yet to be conclusively determined, it is illogical that any statement > as to the scope of the bug can anything more than a hypothesis at best, > irrespective of how well-informed said hypothesis might be. > > As for impartiality, it is entirely conceivable that someone in Ted's > position would be riled by what they perceive (not necessarily correctly) > as negative publicity and to respond in kind. Particularly when one carries > a burden of responsibility of the subsystem in question. > > Until such time as the matter is concluded, ext4 users that value their > data will exercise due concern, naturally. The petty sniping about drumming > up ad-revenue and silly 4chan style image memes do not strike me as a > constructive way in which to assuage those concerns. > > Further, the notion that nobarrier is an "esoteric" option is > questionable. In my experience, it is common practice to employ it as a > performance-enhancing measure on systems equipped with a battery-backed > write cache; especially MySQL servers that must contend with a heavy > workload. One wonders what he would have made of the notion of running ext4 > without a journal, had it not been at the behest of Google. > > In summary, I maintain that his fatuous Google+ post does nothing to > establish just why it is that those of us in the peanut gallery should be > unconcerned as to the impact of the bug. On my part, I will continue to be > concerned until the investigation has fully run its course. > > --Kerin > > http://lwn.net/Articles/521022/ Links to relevant analysis. Useful comments. 'nuff said. -- :wq
