Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:47:50 +0200 From: Teufel <bsd@kuehlbox.de> To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: gjournal and Softupdates Message-ID: <45070EE6.3090104@kuehlbox.de> In-Reply-To: <ygfac55nwyd.fsf@dominion.borderworlds.dk> References: <45066E19.2040405@kuehlbox.de> <ee5vat$fcb$1@sea.gmane.org> <ygfirjto0z2.fsf@dominion.borderworlds.dk> <ee64n4$it$1@sea.gmane.org> <ygfac55nwyd.fsf@dominion.borderworlds.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Christian Laursen wrote: > Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> writes: > > >> Christian Laursen wrote: >> >> >>> However, with journaling you can have filesystem corruption and not know >>> about it. With fsck, bg or not, at least you will know. >>> >> Also, I'm interested about this - what kind of silent corruption? The >> same kind that can generally come from on-drive caches? >> > > Yes, as well as corruption resulting from bugs in the kernel code. The point > is that you will never know because you never check your filesystems. > Well, thats why i actually don't find journaling filesystems very sexy. So the question is, if it is still safe to use fsck on a gjournal enabled FS ? Having a bgfsck running on a 1 TB volume is not so terrible when it afterwards confirms a valid and consistent filesystem.. Just trusting the journal is a false sense of security in my opinion. my 2cp Stephan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45070EE6.3090104>