Re: safe file systems

Erik Andersen (andersen@inconnect.com)
Thu, 25 Sep 1997 10:36:41 -0600 (MDT)


Just a thought. Wouldn't it be OK to simply mount all partitions as
read-only except for a ram-disk to place temporary files on. This way, it
shouldn't matter when people shut the thing down. If you need persistant
storage of process data, mount a remote NFS drive and write stuff there.
Of course, you could use the remote NFS drive to run the whole thing, and
then you could run your system with just a floppy disk to boot the kernel
and tell it where to find the remote NFS server to mount as "/"

-Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen   Web:    http://www.inconnect.com/~andersen/ 
                   email:  andersee@debian.org
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

On Wed, 24 Sep 1997, Robert Wuest wrote:

> Larry McVoy wrote: > > > > Do you think it would be possible to build a safe, slow file system? > > By safe, I mean that I could hit reset in the middle of 50 parallel > > un-tars and reboot the system and the file system comes up clean (no fsck, > > but data loss)? > > I also have a need for this. Well, maybe not this extreme. I would like > to put Linux on the plant floor in a manufacturing environment. The > current solutions use DOS based systems, which are in fact, quite tolerant > to being turned off at random (not completely, but they're pretty good > about it). > > I have in fact brought Linux up on one machine to prove the concept and > demonstrate how nice it is to do system maintenance and software upgrades > without bringing the machine down. Our problem is two fold, power isn't > terribly reliable and the operators are NOT going to learn to shut down > the computer before hitting the master power switch on friday afternoon. > > So the way it sits now, Linux is not a viable solution. > > -- > Robert Wuest, PE Empowered Kemet Electronics > Sirius Engineering Company by robertwuest@kemet.com > mailto:rwuest@sire.vt.com Linux >