|
> Linux saved us from all that. My fingers still habitually run `sync` when they're idling because of my innumerable experiences with filesystem corruption and data loss on Linux during the 1990s. There were just too many bugs that caused corruption (memory or disk) or crashes under heavy load or niche cases, and your best bet at preserving your data was to minimize the window when the disk could be in a stale or, especially, inconsistent state. ext3, which implemented a journal and (modulo bugs) guaranteed constant consistent disk state, didn't come until 2001. XFS was ported to Linux also in 2001, though it was extremely unreliable (on Linux, at least) for several more years. Of course, if you were mostly only serving read-only data via HTTP or FTP, or otherwise running typical 90s websites (Perl CGI, PHP, etc, with intrinsically resilient write patterns[1]), then Linux rocked. Mostly because of ergonomics and accessibility (cost, complexity); and the toolchain and development environment (GNU userland, distribution binary packages, etc) were the bigger reasons for that. Travails with commercial corporate software weren't very common because it was uncommon for vendors to port products to Linux and uncommon for people to bother running them, especially in scenarios where traditional Unix systems were used. [1] Using something like GDBM was begging for unrecoverable corruption. Ironically, MySQL was fairly stable given the nature of usage patterns back then and their interaction with Linux' weak spots. |