Paul Mather wrote: >on reboot. (Actually, what I find to be more inconvenient is the >resynchronisation time needed for my geom_mirror, which takes a lot >longer than a fsck.) I understand that fsck delays for large file >systems is the major impetus behind the journalling work, not as a fix >for a perceived data consistency problem.
Well... I have lost a few (ca. 3) UFS filesystems due to power loss or a kernel crash in the past but interestingly those were all on SCSI (and in the pre-softupdates era, so mounted with sync metadata updates, where this Shouldn't Happen[tm] either..) I've also seen ext2fs (which doesn't have safeguards against fs corruption) on Linux zapped often by power loss and haven't seen a statistically higher number of corrupted ext2fs than ufs. So the whole thing is a bit hard to quantify. However, I'm all for reducing the possibility of corruption when it could be done, programmatically. mkb. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
