Rading this thread about xfs vs ext3, and how ext3 is safer...
I just got ("just" as in "today") an error on one of my ext3 file
systems. Reason? Userspace application allocated a larger chunk of
memory, kernel generated OOM (while there was about 1 gig of swap
still free), and an completely unrelated ext3 file system (app in
question wasn't doing anything on it) got an error, automatically was
remoutned read-only, and marked as in need of fsck.
I've unmounted it, run fsck on it (it found some errors and fixed
them), and now each time I try to mount that file system kernel
reports the file system is marked as having error from previous mount
and that it is in need of fsck.
<flame mode="on">
Now, I wouldn't call this kind of thing "stable" operating system or
"stable" file system. If application asks for too much memory it
should get killed (btw, system had 1 gig of RAM and application asked
for like 600 meg, plus there was plenty of swap space free too -- so I
wouldn't call this a case of app asking too much). You definetely
don't end up with corrupted file system.
</flame>
--
NOTICE: If you are not intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that by reading this message you agreed not to disturb frogs during
mating season. For more info, visit http://www.8-P.ca/