From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 15:41:39 -0400 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <63e733d19bb21d247c90cd6647736bca@ladd.quanstro.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20130602155946.GA76076@intma.in> <17f847d4bb447895848cd56daccb4d7b@proxima.alt.za> <20130602165344.GA92436@intma.in> <914e8aff703ae3592f13e3fa53a2c23f@kw.quanstro.net> <20130603114926.GA19716@intma.in> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] Fossil disk usage over 100%? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 62bcffdc-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > No doubt, but you then do then *exactly* the same thing with cwfs. To > my certain knowledge, it is possible for the old file server to lose > data and files, sometimes catastrophically so, forcing a recover main, > and sometimes, a recover further back. That's unsurprising if you > look at the code. It's easy to fix by making it really, really slow > at writing. And even then, your drives will have buffered the data > and not written it. There's a good reason my file servers were on > UPS. Even that isn't guaranteed, because notoriously, you'll find the > UPS battery has gone just when you need it. i don't have experience with cwfs, but at my old house i had ken's file server running for years with no ups. and power was very unstable. my average uptime was 3 days. i may have been lucky, but i didn't lose data, nor was i forced to recover main. ken's file server *will* have trouble if you interrupt it while it's writing superblocks. this has happened to me twice due to network outages making the remote copy of the worm inaccessable. the file server could have recovered, but was rebooted because it was thought to be hung. obviously, rebooting didn't help, and only forced a recover main. recover main is exactly the same sort of operation as recovering fossil from a venti score. all "recent" (for some value of recent) changes are lost, but "older" data (for some value of older) are preserved. On Mon Jun 3 15:34:26 EDT 2013, sl@9front.org wrote: > Certainly. And we're back at square one. Everyone has their own story > about how they lost data. which is to say that the thesis that fossil sucks is refuted. - erik