From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 5 23:16:25 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C80A106564A for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2009 23:16:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (brucec-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:c09::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 163538FC08 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2009 23:16:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12EBA19017; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 00:16:28 +0000 (GMT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on muon X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=8.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 Received: from gluon.draftnet (unknown [IPv6:2a01:348:10f:0:240:f4ff:fe57:9871]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 00:16:27 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 00:16:14 +0100 From: Bruce Cran To: utisoft@gmail.com Message-ID: <20090406001614.304360d6@gluon.draftnet> In-Reply-To: References: <200903311657.n2VGvLE8010101@lurza.secnetix.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.1 (GTK+ 2.14.7; i386-portbld-freebsd7.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:32:38 +0000 Cc: Wojciech Puchar , olli@lurza.secnetix.de, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, utisoft@googlemail.com Subject: Re: Question about forcing fsck at boottime X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:16:25 -0000 On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 21:40:52 +0100 Chris Rees wrote: > 2009/3/31 Oliver Fromme : > > Chris Rees wrote: > > =A0> 2009/3/31 Wojciech Puchar : > > =A0> > > > =A0> > IMHO this background fsck isn't good idea at all > > =A0> > > =A0> Why? > > > > Google "background fsck damage". > > > > I was bitten by it myself, and I also recommend to turn > > background fsck off. =A0If your disks are large and you > > can't afford the fsck time, consider using ZFS, which > > has a lot of benefits besides not requiring fsck. > > > > Best regards > > =A0 Oliver > > >=20 > Right... You were bitten by background fsck, what _exactly_ happened? > All the 'problems' here associated with bgfsck are referring to > FreeBSD 4 etc, or incredibly vague anecdotal evidence. Have you > googled for background fsck damage? Nothing (in the first two pages at > least) even suggests that background fsck causes damage. > http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=3Dbackground+fsck+corruption You'll find the first few results are about panics during background fsck resulting in an endless cycle of boot-panic-reboot, which don't occur with foreground fsck. And at least the first result is from 6.x. --=20 Bruce Cran