Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:39:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZERO LENGTH DIRECTORY & fsck Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040728103646.16249C-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20040727162553.U68882@ganymede.hub.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Is there anything that can be done to 'fix' this? Under 4.x, using > unionfs (and don't respond if your only answer is "its broken"), if it > crashes, fsck finds a whack of the above ... It's broken. :-) But in all honesty, this has been discussed extensively, and it's carefully documented in the man page. So if you run into bugs, it should not be a surprise. > Now, I think I understand the *why* for the error ... union creates a > 'mirror' of the file system, especially where a du/find is concerned, > and teh ZLDs are 'end nodes' that have no files under them ... but is > there a better way that fsck can handle those? Its almost as if it > doesn't know what to do with them, so has to remove them all ... Are you using union mounting of UFS or unionfs? Theory tells us that unionfs is a stacked file system layer, and shouldn't directly manipulate the on-disk layout of UFS, instead, issuing vnode operations that allow UFS to maintain its consistency guarantees. Theory tells us that union mounting UFS relies on UFS doing the magic, which means it has more opportunity to currupt on disk storage. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040728103646.16249C-100000>