Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:06:48 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, utisoft@gmail.com Cc: Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, utisoft@gmail.com Subject: Re: Question about forcing fsck at boottime Message-ID: <20090331210648.1f835fcf.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <200903311657.n2VGvLE8010101@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <b79ecaef0903310247o356fdfb8mdc8cd2c3621366ee@mail.gmail.com> <200903311657.n2VGvLE8010101@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:57:21 +0200 (CEST), Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> wrote: > Google "background fsck damage". > > I was bitten by it myself, and I also recommend to turn > background fsck off. If 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. You can always ask yourself: "What is more important, the boot-up time or my data?" In any case, I'd recommend to emphasize the importance of the data, so even with larger UFS disks, it's okay to wait a bit, but then be sure that nothing is damaged. Furthermore, I agree with the recommendation of ZFS. If your hardware is good enough (which shouldn't be a problem today), ZFS handles possible data damages much better and faster. -- Polytropon >From 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?20090331210648.1f835fcf.freebsd>