From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 15:29:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 15:29:39 -0400 Received: from tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil ([204.222.179.33]:19827 "EHLO tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 15:29:38 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:29:33 -0500 (CDT) From: Jesse Pollard Message-Id: <200205141929.OAA81537@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> To: viro@math.psu.edu, Jesse Pollard Subject: Re: [RFC] ext2 and ext3 block reservations can be bypassed cc: mark@mark.mielke.cc, elladan@eskimo.com, Christoph Hellwig , Linux-Kernel X-Mailer: [XMailTool v3.1.2b] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --------- Received message begins Here --------- > > > > On Tue, 14 May 2002, Jesse Pollard wrote: > > > However, not all daemons run as root, but do log into /var/adm or /var/log. > > If these fill up the log device without restraint, then your audit logs will > > ALSO be affected (unless you have syslog send them to a different host). > > syslogd _does_ run as root and it can happily overflow the damn thing, > reserved blocks or not. > Absolutely - and it should, since that IS the primary audit log daemon. I don't consider that a "bug". Only if a "user" process (non-root, or non-designated user) can exceed the set bounds, by either appending, or filling in a hole, should there be a bug in the system. Personally, I think ext2 works great. (And I DON'T count the time experimental code with the warning "caution, may be hazardous to your filesystem" as causing problems - I had expected it to.) I've never had a problem with ext2, even when I did fill the filesystem. I was able to log in and view the audit log, and clean up without problems - exactly as I would expect. It has been the most stable file system I've ever used (and I've used quite a few - old Files-11 and Files-32, RT11, dos, UFS, UNICOS nc1, SGI efs and xfs ...) Easier fsck procedure than all of them. Fixed any inconsistancies as well and didn't loose any resident files. I've only lost one ext2fs - and that was due to a head crash. The drive had been running for a couple of years continuously, with only a few mis-guided reboots. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesse I Pollard, II Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil Any opinions expressed are solely my own.