bl...@internode.on.net (Brett Lymn) writes:
>This argument has always puzzled me even if you leave aside the fact
>that we have wapbl so most of the time it is just a matter of replaying
>the log and on your way - even if you suffer through a fsck, so what if
>you have / up first?
Then you have a running system that can e.g. talk to the network.
Better than fighting against WAPBL with a damaged journal that
you cannot skip.
> This may be satisfying from a sys admin point of
>view
Indeed, that's satisfying from a sys admin point of view, and no,
removing obstacles helps to get things repaired faster and with
less effort.
The alternative is to have junk systems, usually virtualized, that
nobody cares about repairing. Just spin up another VM when the
ashtray got full. Don't misunderstand me, that is a popular option,
I run thousands of such systems, but it's neither the whole world
nor a contradiction. Even such systems split their data between
different filesystems, for a reason.
--
--
Michael van Elst
Internet: mlel...@serpens.de
"A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
