Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 19:37:39 +0400 From: "Marat N.Afanasyev" <amarat@ksu.ru> To: Marko Lerota <mlerota@claresco.hr> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Constant rebooting after power loss Message-ID: <4D95F143.8080001@ksu.ru> In-Reply-To: <874o6ip0ak.fsf@cosmos.claresco.hr> References: <87d3l6p5xv.fsf@cosmos.claresco.hr> <AANLkTi=kEyz-mKLzdV8LAf91ZhMTP8gLKs=3Eu5WD8mh@mail.gmail.com> <874o6ip0ak.fsf@cosmos.claresco.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms080903030903020306070002 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Marko Lerota wrote: > George Kontostanos<gkontos.mail@gmail.com> writes: > >> Not with the same behavior and it depends on what your server is doing= at >> the time of the power interruption. > > It was in stage of booting after first power loss. > >> but ZFS is not the solution to your problem. ZFS is not designed to re= place >> the needs of a UPS. > > I'm just asking if this wouldn't happen if I used ZFS. I read that ZFS > don't need fsck because the files are always consistent on filesystem > regardless of power loses. That the corruption can occur only if disks > are damaged. But not when power goes down. I'm not planing to buy UPS > for home use. > to ensure consistency you should turn off physical drive caches, and=20 degrade performance significantly, sometimes up to 1000x. if this is=20 what you want, you may use either zfs or sync ufs. in such case you may=20 be almost sure that your filesystems are consistent. but if you use=20 drive's cache, then without UPS you will face data loss and vanished=20 filesystem earlier or later --=20 =F3 =D5=D7=C1=D6=C5=CE=C9=C5=CD, =ED=C1=D2=C1=D4 =E1=C6=C1=CE=C1=D3=D8=C5= =D7 --------------ms080903030903020306070002--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D95F143.8080001>