The Reliability of Modern File Systems in the face of SSD Errors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As solid state drives (SSDs) are increasingly replacing hard disk drives, the reliability of storage systems depends on the failure modes of SSDs and the ability of the file system layered on top to handle these failure modes. While the classical paper on IRON File Systems provides a thorough study of the failure policies of three file systems common at the time, we argue that 13 years later it is time to revisit file system reliability with SSDs and their reliability characteristics in mind, based on modern file systems that incorporate journaling, copy-on-write, and log-structured approaches and are optimized for flash. This article presents a detailed study, spanning ext4, Btrfs, and F2FS, and covering a number of different SSD error modes. We develop our own fault injection framework and explore over 1,000 error cases. Our results indicate that 16% of these cases result in a file system that cannot be mounted or even repaired by its system checker. We also identify the key file system metadata structures that can cause such failures, and, finally, we recommend some design guidelines for file systems that are deployed on top of SSDs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it