Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Tuesday May 26 2015, @04:16PM   Printer-friendly
from the patch-immediately dept.

The combination of RAID0 redundancy, an ext4 filesystem, a Linux 4.x kernel, and either Debian Linux or Arch Linux has been associated with data corruption.

El Reg reports EXT4 filesystem can EAT ALL YOUR DATA

Fixes are available, one explained by Lukas Czerner on the Linux Kernel Mailing List. That post suggests the bug is long-standing, possibly as far back as the 3.12-stable kernel. Others suggest the bug has only manifested in Linux 4.x.

[...] This patch for version 4.x and the patched Linux kernel 3.12.43 LTS both seem like sensible code to contemplate.


[Editor's Comment: Original Submission]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tynin on Tuesday May 26 2015, @08:55PM

    by tynin (2013) on Tuesday May 26 2015, @08:55PM (#188272) Journal

    Indeed, and if you stay away from cutting edge releases, you'd continue having an extremely reliable ext4 FS. I've never thought RAID made sense in the home setting, aside from maybe software RAID. It just adds a layer of complexity that will likely jam up in some unhelpful way. But if you are running racks of identical servers, with spare identical RAID cards, it is dreamy. Just avoid the hype of the bleeding edge OS's and let them mature before rolling it out into production envs (or even dev envs, lest the users end up wanting something new and shiny rushed into prod).

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by kurenai.tsubasa on Wednesday May 27 2015, @12:20AM

    by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Wednesday May 27 2015, @12:20AM (#188358) Journal

    RAID in the home setting does make sense if you want to build a huge file server and don't want a pre-built NAS or multiple mount points for each disk. At home, we decided to go with software RAID like you indicated because it's simpler and the only hardware needed was a bunch of SATA ports. (We went with RAID 1+0 instead of 5 again for simplicity, but we've somehow managed to fill up 8 TB and may opt for RAID 5 instead of buying more disks—CPU overhead isn't a concern.)