* Sergey Babkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [011218 19:45] wrote:
> Dan Nelson wrote:
> >
> > In the last episode (Dec 18), Mike Bristow said:
> > > I suspect that the background fsck[1] that's available in FreeBSD-current
> > > fits the bill just as well as JFS or XFS - and I'll also bet that it'll
> > > be available in a FreeBSD-release before I'd trust data to a port of
> > > JFS or XFS.
> >
> > The problems with a background fsck is you still have to run fsck,
> > which can take 10 minutes on a large volume when it's idle, and who
>
> By the way the journaling filesystems don't neccessary guarantee that
> you won't need fsck: for example, if VXFS crashes at a particularly
> bad moment, it will require you to do "fsck -o full" which is as slow
> as the fsck on traditional UFS.
Yeah, but that's not mentioned in the whitepaper! :)
--
-Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'
http://www.morons.org/rants/gpl-harmful.php3
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
