Comment 132 for bug 317781

As for configuration registry:

Filesystems are about files exactly same as sqlite and other databases are about records. Actually, files could be treated like some sort of records in some sort of very specific database (if we'll ignore some specifics).

And we're, the users expect BOTH databases and file systems (at least these with journal) to care about our data and their integrity. And if file system does not wants to care about data integrity and rather tries to push data integrity question into another extra layer like databases instead of taking care on this question itself, why I should trust to such file system? Am I really expected to store my valuable data on a file system which prefers speed over data integrity?

As for me, I want file system to provide data integrity on it's own, without REQUIRING extra layers like sqlite in applications. If file is written and closed, it have to be on disk. And as for me, gain of less fragnemtation and some gain in speed due to temp files in RAM are not worth of possible data losses due to over-aggressive caching (and ALL apps will be NEVER rewritten to use extra bloat like sqlite database just to keep data integrity).

Sorry if some words are offensive or wrong but offer to use sqlite for data integity REALLY HURTS and RAISES QUESTION: why should I trust my data to such filesystem? As for now, I'm probably have to stick to ext3 even if this costs some speed but it does not loses data at least.

P.S. I'm also using XFS _but_ only on computers where performance valued over data integrity and only with UPSes. And I'm unable to supply UPSes to each and every computer. So - in short, users need RELIABLE file systems which are providing reliability without extra layers like sqlite. Please do not disregard this simple fact. Sorry once more if this sounds offensive or whatever else.