WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

Re: [Xen-users] How (not) to destroy a PostgreSQL db in domU on powerfai

To: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] How (not) to destroy a PostgreSQL db in domU on powerfail
From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 21:51:27 +0100
Delivery-date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:52:16 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200902240619.40822.javier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: it-management http://it-management.at
References: <200902241021.57609@xxxxxx> <200902240619.40822.javier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.10.3 (Linux/2.6.27.19-ZMI; KDE/4.1.3; x86_64; ; )
On Dienstag 24 Februar 2009 Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
> if you don't have highly reliable hardware, with redundant channels
> and battery backed caches, etc. stay away from XFS.

That's what I have! RAID Controller, battery backed cache, disk write 
cache=off, UPS. Well, the UPS didn't help as my daughter switched off 
the server directly.

> it's a pity, but XFS is only as reliable as the hardware you give it.
>  in other words: you can be really sure that a software issue won't
> trash your XFS filesystem; but also that a hardware failure
> definitely will.
> ext3, OTOH, might not have such an impressive record of correctness;
> but it's designed with redundancy in mind.  almost all vital
> structures are either replicated or reconstructable from other hints.
>  that makes fsck slow but effective, and in most cases, the journal
> analysis done when remounting after an unclean shutdown is enough to
> put it back on track.
>
> i sure wish i could use XFS in more circumstances, but the needed
> hardware is prohibitive.

Here the answer from XFS developers:
*************
The difference is just that you actually see the corruption on XFS while 
it's pretty silent on extN.  If your Hardware (or Hypervisor) is not 
reliable you _will_ lose data.  Either silently or with a spectacular 
blowup if the filesystem actually has consistency checking (which XFS 
has a lot).
*************

IOW: The problem is that XEN doesn't strictly follow write barriers. Is 
there a way I can make it do that?

mfg zmi
-- 
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc    -----      http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31                      .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key:         "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38  500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net                  Key-ID: 1C1209B4


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users