From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep 30 16:29:22 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6660816A4BF
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ganymede.hub.org (u173n10.eastlink.ca [24.224.173.10])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6068843F93
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:29:19 -0700 (PDT)	(envelope-from scrappy@hub.org)
Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id C0F3E33D0E; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:28:20 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id BDAA033C2D; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:28:20 -0300 (ADT)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:28:20 -0300 (ADT)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
To: Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
In-Reply-To: <20031001010119.M592@korben.in.tern>
Message-ID: <20030930202715.C94686@ganymede.hub.org>
References: <20030930221148.54E7E5D07@ptavv.es.net>
	<20030930194544.H94686@ganymede.hub.org>
	<20031001010119.M592@korben.in.tern>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Improvements to fsck performance in -current ...? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 23:29:22 -0000



On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Lukas Ertl wrote:

> > are either of these enhancements back-patchable to the 4.x fsck, or do
> > they require some non-4.x compatible changes to work?
>
> It's not just the fsck application itself, background fsck basically needs
> file system snapshots, which are only available on UFS2, and I'm not sure
> if they can be backported to UFS1 at all.

Ah, okay, so when I move my servers to 5.x, then I'm going to need to
reformat the systems from scratch, else I lose some serious improvements
... is there a list somewhere of what UFS2 has over UFS1?  "file system
snapshots", is that similar to journalling?