Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 22:32:40 +0000 From: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie> To: Andrea Campi <andrea@webcom.it> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Thomas <tomsoft@Netz-Werker.COM>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: growfs Message-ID: <200103182232.aa63999@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 18 Mar 2001 23:08:04 %2B0100." <20010318230804.A4160@webcom.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20010318230804.A4160@webcom.it>, Andrea Campi writes: > >Anyway, that was not my point. If I reboot into single-user, and am thus sure >to have the / fs in a clean, consistent state, should I expect growfs to work >in a safe way? If so, we should document it. I think it is still unlikely to be completely safe. The kernel may panic if it finds inconsistencies in the filesystem, and I'm sure that growfs (temporarily) introduces some very serious inconsistencies while it is running. Also, when growfs completes, the kernel's idea of the filesystem is quite different from the parameters actually set on the disk. If the kernel was to panic half-way through a growfs operation, or if growfs died, say because the kernel failed to fault in some pages from the growfs executable, you could end up with a very confused filesystem! Ian 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? <200103182232.aa63999>