Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 14 Oct 2013 15:21:17 -0700
From:      Charles Swiger <>
To:        RW <>
Subject:   Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <l3gc7e$c91$> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Oct 14, 2013, at 12:41 PM, RW <> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:48:18 -0700 Charles Swiger wrote:
>> Yes.  Without journalling, you'd normally perform the full
>> timeconsuming fsck in the foreground.
> Journalling removes the need for the background fsck which only recovers
> lost space. 

That and inode link changes (ie, adding or removing files from a directory).

>> With journalling, it should be able to do a journal replay to restore
>> the filesystem to an OK state,
> My understanding is that the journal does nothing to restore the
> filesystem other than keep track of orphaned memory. In all other
> respect it's the job of soft-updates to keep the filesystem in an OK
> state.

Yes, SU is supposed to reorder filesystem operations to provide some level
of "ACID" transaction semantics-- and the journal helps that by avoiding
the need for bgfsck.

> When it doesn't you need a foreground check.
>> but sometimes that doesn't restore consistency, in which case it
>> usually fires off a background fsck rather than the foreground fsck.
> I think if the journal fails, you would really need to run at least a
> foreground preen, maybe a full fsck. 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>