Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 16:57:49 +0100 From: Andrea Campi <andrea@webcom.it> To: Thomas <tomsoft@Netz-Werker.COM> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: growfs Message-ID: <20010318165749.A725@webcom.it> In-Reply-To: <20010317110034.62878@Netz-Werker.NET>; from tomsoft@Netz-Werker.COM on Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 11:00:34AM %2B0100 References: <20010311141337.A510@webcom.it> <20010317110034.62878@Netz-Werker.NET>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> This was completely untested by us, and is not guaranteed to work! I think
> you were lucky. We move and change blocks on the filesystem, during some
> time the filesystem is NOT consitent, so if one of those files is accessed than
> you might run into a panic.
Sorry? In single user with a readonly / and nothing else? I would have to be
EXTREMELY unlucky to get any other access while the fs is inconsistent ;-)
Seriously, I get the point (shit happens doesn't it?), but this prompts my next
question: isn't this the same as running fsck? Maybe with growfs we have a
longer window of inconsistency, but the idea is mostly the same. I think there
should be (probably there already is) a way to "reserve" access to the fs, so
that no other process can possibly get an inconsistent state.
--
Speak softly and carry a cellular phone.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010318165749.A725>