"Ingo Weinhold" <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > No, I meant: > > meta data = file and dir inodes, etc > > user data = actual file data > > > > IIRC, only the former is journalled by BFS. > Oh, is that true?! Didn't know that. It's exactly like that: logging file data would be ways to expensive. Also, it wouldn't be doable with the current BFS log architecture (it only has a maximum of 2048 blocks in the cache). Losing file data with BFS (and almost any other journaled file system, btw) is certainly possible. A journaled file system shouldn't save you backups but the time it needs to recover from system failures. It's not even safe against hardware failures :-) > ... > A central place where all the existing jobs are entered is needed in > any case. Whether it should also be the common place for logging, > well, > I don't know -- I don't think, I understand the whole thing good > enough > to make some qualified statement at this time. :-) My plan is like this (for R2, anyway): I will first implement the easiest way to get this thing going, and that'll be the spare partition approach. Later, I will investigate in other, more appealing solutions (to Joe user including Tyler and me ;-)). I think we have found enough solution and hints for the problems the will come up, that it's time to start developing it. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait a bit until it happens, but that's not sooo bad, since we get a whole working OpenBeOS during that time :-)) Adios... Axel.