Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:28:47 +0200 From: Jorn Argelo <jorn@wcborstel.nl> To: Ronald Klop <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org> Cc: Niki Denev <ndenev@icdsoft.com>, JM <jmartin37@speakeasy.net>, Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: background fsck can be dangerous! Message-ID: <42C4019F.2060305@wcborstel.nl> In-Reply-To: <op.ss6rnzu88527sy@localhost> References: <200506291704.50185.ndenev@icdsoft.com> <059901c57cb4$9a366220$7f06000a@int.mediasurface.com> <20050630060612.GF1074@green.homeunix.org> <42C3F7F3.809@speakeasy.net> <42C3F8A9.7030705@wcborstel.nl> <op.ss6rnzu88527sy@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ronald Klop wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:50:33 +0200, Jorn Argelo <jorn@wcborstel.nl> > wrote: > >> JM wrote: >> >>> Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 03:12:37PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've not had a single crash / power outage that background fsck has >>>>> been able to deal with. 90% of the time the machine will fail to even >>>>> boot to single user mode :( >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> You should turn write caching off on your drives. >>>> >>> and in addition to that... you can enable a foreground fsck at boot >>> which might be the better option if boot times aren't an issue. >> >> >> >> May I ask how I can do that? Because I've always prefered foreground >> fsck then background fsck to be honest. At least you can see what >> the machine is doing. > > > See background_fsck in rc.conf. See also the text below. :-) > > ronald. Whoops, heh. I missed that part, sorry about that. Thanks for the pointer. Jorn > >> >> Jorn >> >>> >>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Niki Denev" <ndenev@icdsoft.com> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I want just to share my last experience with the combination of >>>>>> power failure + background fsck. After the power returned and >>>>>> the machine booted, it sheduled background fsck after 60 >>>>>> seconds, but >>>>>> at this point most of the services were already started, and some >>>>>> of them seemed to rely on files that were probably in unclean >>>>>> state before the check. >>>>>> This unfortunately leaded to some lost email...after the fsck >>>>>> completed, >>>>>> everything runs ok, but i have now set background_fsck to NO in >>>>>> rc.conf. >>>>>> >>>>>> Here is a sad sample from my qmail log file : >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc24fc21cc delivery 1: success: >>>>>> /libexec/ld-elf.so.1:_Shared_object_"libpq.so.3"_not_found,_required_by_"dspam"/did_0+0+1/ >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc24fff25c status: local 2/30 remote 0/20 >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc250151ec delivery 4: success: >>>>>> /libexec/ld-elf.so.1:_Shared_object_"libpq.so.3"_not_found,_required_by_"dspam"/did_0+0+1/ >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc2502bd34 status: local 1/30 remote 0/20 >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc25050ef4 end msg 23982 >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc2508b0a4 delivery 2: success: >>>>>> /libexec/ld-elf.so.1:_Shared_object_"libpq.so.3"_not_found,_required_by_"dspam"/did_0+0+1/ >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc250a9cd4 status: local 0/30 remote 0/20 >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc250c7d4c end msg 24087 >>>>>> @4000000042c1badc2510942c end msg 24040 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> The filesystem looks the same before, during, and after background >>>> fsck runs, other than the free space information. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42C4019F.2060305>