On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Roberto Pereyra wrote:
> FreeBSD 4.9 can fsck in the background too, look /etc/defaults/rc.conf
> Set in /etc/rc.conf
> fsck_y_enable="YES"
all that does is to automatically answer Y whenever fsck asks you a
question. it still doesnt make fsck happen in the background as the
Matthew Seaman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:49:34AM +, Peter Risdon wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Certainly. You will find it better suited to the large filesystems
you have than UFS1. I also have a vague feeling that background fsck
is a UFS2 feature, but I can't find documentation to
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 07:22:04AM -0300, Roberto Pereyra wrote:
>
> > However the fsck of our 300+500 GB RAIDs
> > takes almost an hour and that's why i want to switch to 5.x because it
> > fscks in the background.
> FreeBSD 4.9 can fsck in the background too, look /etc/defaults/rc.conf
>
> S
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 07:22:04AM -0300, Roberto Pereyra typed:
>
> > However the fsck of our 300+500 GB RAIDs
> > takes almost an hour and that's why i want to switch to 5.x because it
> > fscks in the background.
>
> Hi
>
> FreeBSD 4.9 can fsck in the background too, look /etc/defaults/rc.c
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:49:34AM +, Peter Risdon typed:
> Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> >Certainly. You will find it better suited to the large filesystems
> >
> >you have than UFS1. I also have a vague feeling that background fsck
> >is a UFS2 feature, but I can't find documentation to either
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:49:34AM +, Peter Risdon wrote:
> Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >Certainly. You will find it better suited to the large filesystems
> >you have than UFS1. I also have a vague feeling that background fsck
> >is a UFS2 feature, but I can't find documentation to either confi
> However the fsck of our 300+500 GB RAIDs
> takes almost an hour and that's why i want to switch to 5.x because it
> fscks in the background.
Hi
FreeBSD 4.9 can fsck in the background too, look /etc/defaults/rc.conf
Set in /etc/rc.conf
fsck_y_enable="YES"
roberto
> The machine is an AS
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Certainly. You will find it better suited to the large filesystems
you have than UFS1. I also have a vague feeling that background fsck
is a UFS2 feature, but I can't find documentation to either confirm or
deny that.
I'm sure this is right. If one of my 5.* machines has
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:45:31AM +0100, Heinrich Rebehn wrote:
> I am considering switching our "production" server from 4.9 to 5.2.
> "production" means that it serves some 20 people at our university
> institute.
> Unfortunately the machine crashes occasionally which would be tolerable
> if
