barrier and commit options?

[Miller, Mike (OS Dev)]

Eric wrote:
> 
> Christian Kujau wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
> >> I know I may loose the last 30 seconds of "work" (it's just a home 
> >> server), but is the filesystem at risk (corruption, whatever, ...) 
> >> with these mount options ?
> > 
> > No, why would it? If certain mount options would make a filesystem 
> > prone to corruption I'd consider this a bug.
> 
> Well, that's not exactly true.  Turning off barriers, 
> depending on your storage, could lead to corruption in some 

I hope this a proper forum for this inquiry. I'm the maintainer of the HP Smart Array driver, cciss. We've had requests and now a bug report to support write barriers. 
It seems that write barriers are primarily intended to ensure the proper ordering of data from the disks write cache to the medium. Is this accurate?

Thanks,
-- mikem

> cases.  Mounting with data=writeback can expose stale data, 
> which could even be a security issue.
> 
> But as long as you make these decisions consciously, they may 
> fit your needs.
> 
> >  So apart from losing a few more
> > seconds of work in case of an error, the fs should be fine.
> 
> This part is correct, barriers on and longer commit time 
> should not affect filesystem consistency / integrity.
> 
> -Eric
> 
> > C.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ext3-users mailing list
> Ext3-users at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
>