Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 19:27:59 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.demon.nl> To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@thinksec.com>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ideas concerning fsck Message-ID: <20001023192759.A1077@freebie.demon.nl> In-Reply-To: <200010222322.QAA06345@beastie.mckusick.com>; from mckusick@mckusick.com on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 04:22:53PM -0700 References: <xzpsnpprcat.fsf@des.thinksec.com> <200010222322.QAA06345@beastie.mckusick.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 04:22:53PM -0700, Kirk McKusick wrote:
> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@thinksec.com>
> Date: 22 Oct 2000 01:42:50 +0200
>
> What do people think about dispensing with the Pass# argument in fstab
> and instead using the following algorithm for 'fsck -p':
>
> 1) if the device does not begin with a slash, assume this is a
> pseudo-filesystem, and skip this entry.
>
> 2) if the mountpoint is "none", skip this entry.
>
> 3) if the fs type is known, run the appropriate command (which can
> be null, e.g. for cd9660), and skip to the next entry.
>
> 4) if the fs type is unknown, but fsck_${fstype} exists, run it and
> skip to the next entry.
>
> 5) print a big fat "Unknown file system type" warning and skip to
> the next entry.
>
> As for which order to fsck file systems in, do / first, and everything
> else in parallell afterwards (possibly with additional logic to try to
> identify file systems that are on the same device and fsck them
> sequentially to avoid thrashing)
>
> I'm willing to write the code if people think it's a good idea.
>
> DES
> --
> Dag-Erling Smrgrav - des@thinksec.com
>
> The current suggested use of the pass # is to set the root filesystem
> to pass 1, and everything else that you want checked with pass 2. Fsck
> has a heuristic to decide which filesystems are on the same drive and
> will run them serially (see fsck/preen.c); filesystems on different
> spindles will be run in parallel. Running the root separately and by
I could imagine that for multiple filesystems sharing one (hardware) RAID
volume one might want to be able to override this heuristic. The inherent
parallelism allowed by RAID would allow checking of multiple filesystems
on the (apparantly) same spindle without speed degradation/trashing.
W/
--
Wilko Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands
wilko@freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org http://www.nlfug.nl
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001023192759.A1077>