list of filesystems with known issues

[Matt Mackall]

On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 18:56 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
> Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> writes:
> > On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 17:10 +0100, Jens.Wulf at sew-eurodrive.de wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> every once in a while someone with a corrupted repo pops up on this list. Sometimes it is because he used hg on a filesystem which has issues. 
> >> Searching the bugtracker, wiki and mailing list didn't reveal that
> >> much about filesystems which should be avoided, though. Maybe I just
> >> didn't use the right keywords, but everything I found was 
> >>   "There are known problems with XFS on Linux, but that's about it."
> >> 
> >> Which ones cause problems?
> >
> > XFS on Linux: some versions lose writes to revlogs (should be fixed in
> > Linux kernels from the past year or so).
> >
> > NFS on Linux: some versions have attribute caching bugs that
> > occasionally cause incorrect output from hg status (again, fixed in
> > recent kernels).
> 
> Some time ago (0.9.x era), Mercurial had problems doing local clones on
> AFS (due, I believe, to its lack of hard link support).  Is this still
> the case today?

At least some AFS implementation have *broken* hard-link support, which
fails to report failure to create links. This defeats Mercurial's
automatic fallback. If someone with AFS cared, they could probably fix
this with a couple hours of work.

But Mercurial is still perfectly safe and usable otherwise on AFS as far
as we know.

-- 
http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux