Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 04:52:54 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Matt Smith <fbsd@xtaz.co.uk> Cc: Julien Cigar <jcigar@ulb.ac.be>, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Message-ID: <20151022045254.57c5c8d0.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20151021152015.GF90075@xtaz.uk> References: <867fmh12nq.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <CALfReyfg-71nCg4K0dKmUK-YmZ8yi0ppeGGv4WOD-2Mt8NP9HQ@mail.gmail.com> <86pp081glq.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <CA%2BtpaK0ezoi7wBBD9VZwREq9Qp0YaJNfJY42=tZAYi5VSL8rCA@mail.gmail.com> <20151021143525.GX87605@mordor.lan> <20151021152015.GF90075@xtaz.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:20:15 +0100, Matt Smith wrote: > On Oct 21 16:35, Julien Cigar wrote: > >The main advantage of SU+J over SU is to avoid a fsck at boot if the FS > >is not clean. Note that SU+J almost never worked for me and disabling > >SU+J (tunefs -j disable) is the first thing I do after an installation. > > Agreed. I don't understand why this mode has been made the default. SU > always works fine for me but SU+J always causes corrupted filesystems > which it never bothers to fix either in the background or the > foreground. I have to disable the journal and manually fsck it to get a > clean filesystem once again. Seems completely flawed. Same here. Even if a background fsck is being run, the file system still kept some corruptions and would not be marked clean, so the same thing repeated at next boot. A forced full foreground fsck (!) would sometimes fix it, sometimes two (!) runs were needed. By switching off J things went back to normal again. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20151022045254.57c5c8d0.freebsd>