Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:41 PM, RW wrote: > On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:48:18 -0700 Charles Swiger wrote: >> Yes. Without journalling, you'd normally perform the full >> timeconsuming fsck in the foreground. > > Journalling removes the need for the background fsck which only recovers > lost space. Th

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

Hi-- On Oct 14, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Daniel Feenberg wrote: > This discussion skirts the critical issue - are files that are not open for > writing endangered? No description of the uses of journaling can be > considered informative if it doesn't address that explicitly. As a naive user > I have

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 14.10.2013 20:43, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 1:33 PM, CeDeROM > wrote: > > Thank you for explaining :-) So it looks that it would be sensible to > force filesystem check every n-th mount..? > > > Please explain the logic in which this he

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 14.10.2013 18:47, Adam Vande More wrote: > There is no *warranty* as explicitly stated in > http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html > Aha, please don't play on words ;-). I think you understood I was speaking about the filesystem state not a lawyer issue.

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 14.10.2013 20:08, RW wrote: > On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:34:36 +0200 > David Demelier wrote: > >> On 14.10.2013 14:39, RW wrote: > >>> If you are having problems with data integrity you might try >>> gjournal or zfs instead. >> >> Why? SU+J is enabled by default. Isn't the purpose of a journaled f

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:48:18 -0700 Charles Swiger wrote: > fsck_y_enable="YES" One of the most annoying things about SU+J is that fsck asks if you want to use the journal. So fsck -y wont do a proper check unless the journal replay fails. ___ freebsd-q

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

Charles Swiger wrote: [snip] > Yes. Without journalling, you'd normally perform the full timeconsuming > fsck > in the foreground. With journalling, it should be able to do a journal > replay to restore the filesystem to an OK state, but sometimes that > doesn't restore consistency, in which c

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:48:18 -0700 Charles Swiger wrote: > Yes. Without journalling, you'd normally perform the full > timeconsuming fsck in the foreground. Journalling removes the need for the background fsck which only recovers lost space. > With journalling, it should be > able to do a j

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013, Bruce Cran wrote: On 10/14/2013 6:16 PM, CeDeROM wrote: Isn't there Journal to prevent and reverse such damage? Unlike other journaling filesystems, UFS+J only protects the metadata, not the data itself - i.e. I think it ensures you won't have to run a manual fsck, bu

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

Thank you all for good hints! This will come handy! :-) -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Oct 14, 2013, at 11:33 AM, CeDeROM wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Bruce Cran wrote: >> On 10/14/2013 6:16 PM, CeDeROM wrote: >>> Isn't there Journal to prevent and reverse such damage? >> >> Unlike other journaling filesystems, UFS+J only protects the metadata, not >> the data itse

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: > > > mount -o sync > should be mount sync -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 1:33 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > Thank you for explaining :-) So it looks that it would be sensible to > force filesystem check every n-th mount..? Please explain the logic in which this helps anything. > Or to do a filesystem check > after crash..? Already standard behavio

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 10/14/2013 7:33 PM, CeDeROM wrote: Thank you for explaining :-) So it looks that it would be sensible to force filesystem check every n-th mount..? Or to do a filesystem check after crash..? Are there any flags like that to mark filesystem unclean and to force fsck after n-th mount? That would

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Bruce Cran wrote: > On 10/14/2013 6:16 PM, CeDeROM wrote: >> Isn't there Journal to prevent and reverse such damage? > > Unlike other journaling filesystems, UFS+J only protects the metadata, not > the data itself - i.e. I think it ensures you won't have to run a m

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:34:36 +0200 David Demelier wrote: > On 14.10.2013 14:39, RW wrote: > > If you are having problems with data integrity you might try > > gjournal or zfs instead. > > Why? SU+J is enabled by default. Isn't the purpose of a journaled file > system to ensure that any bad shutd

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 10/14/2013 6:16 PM, CeDeROM wrote: Isn't there Journal to prevent and reverse such damage? Unlike other journaling filesystems, UFS+J only protects the metadata, not the data itself - i.e. I think it ensures you won't have to run a manual fsck, but just like plain old UFS files may be trun

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Brad Mettee wrote: > On 10/14/2013 12:50 PM, CeDeROM wrote: >> Then why random files gets damaged as well even they are not >> accessed/written on power loss? :-) > > Random files can be affected because the sectors of the hard disk containing > the directory entri

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 10/14/2013 12:50 PM, CeDeROM wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:34 AM, David Demelier wrote: Why? SU+J is enabled by default. Isn't the purpose of a journaled file system to ensure that any bad shutdown will protect data? As already st

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:50 AM, CeDeROM wrote: >> Then why random files gets damaged as well even they are not >> accessed/written on power loss? :-) > Prove they weren't. Hmm, maybe /etc/pwd.db as David mentioned? This is updated on pa

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:50 AM, CeDeROM wrote: > > Then why random files gets damaged as well even they are not > accessed/written on power loss? :-) > Prove they weren't. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lis

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:34 AM, David Demelier > wrote: >> >> Why? SU+J is enabled by default. Isn't the purpose of a journaled file >> system to ensure that any bad shutdown will protect data? > > As already stated, those measures are to

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:34 AM, David Demelier wrote: > > Why? SU+J is enabled by default. Isn't the purpose of a journaled file > system to ensure that any bad shutdown will protect data? > As already stated, those measures are to preserve fs integrity eg meta data is in sync. It doesn't ensu

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:34 PM, David Demelier wrote: > Why? SU+J is enabled by default. Isn't the purpose of a journaled file > system to ensure that any bad shutdown will protect data? > > On GNU/Linux, on Windows you will not require anything else to recover > your data. > > I don't want to tw

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 14.10.2013 14:39, RW wrote: > On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 05:02:22 -0400 > Michael Powell wrote: > >> David Demelier wrote: >> >>> Hello there, >>> >>> I'm writing because after a power failure I was unable to log in on >>> my FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE. The SU+J journal were executed correctly >>> but some f

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 05:02:22 -0400 Michael Powell wrote: > David Demelier wrote: > > > Hello there, > > > > I'm writing because after a power failure I was unable to log in on > > my FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE. The SU+J journal were executed correctly > > but some files disappeared, including /etc/pwd.

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

Michael Powell wrote: [snip] > The other box is my first foray into the land of GPT, along with SU+J. It > was sitting at the 'couldn't mount... Press return for /bin/sh' line. > There was an error indicating that replaying one or more journals had > failed. I was able to successfully fsck all the

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

David Demelier wrote: > Hello there, > > I'm writing because after a power failure I was unable to log in on my > FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE. The SU+J journal were executed correctly but some > files disappeared, including /etc/pwd.db. Thus I was unable to log in. > > I've been able to regenerate the p

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

> On 13.10.2013 12:16, CeDeROM wrote: > > On 13 Oct 2013 11:30, "David Demelier" > > wrote: > >> Hello there, > >> I'm writing because after a power failure I was unable to log in on my > >> FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE. The SU+J journal were executed correctly but some > >

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 13.10.2013 12:16, CeDeROM wrote: > On 13 Oct 2013 11:30, "David Demelier" > wrote: >> Hello there, >> I'm writing because after a power failure I was unable to log in on my >> FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE. The SU+J journal were executed correctly but some >> files disapp

Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure

On 13 Oct 2013 11:30, "David Demelier" wrote: > Hello there, > I'm writing because after a power failure I was unable to log in on my > FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE. The SU+J journal were executed correctly but some > files disappeared, including /etc/pwd.db. Thus I was unable to log in. > I've been able t