On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:35:35PM -0500, Dave Uhring wrote: > > You seem to have missed the critical point of that paper. When the > system goes completely haywire and either crashes or locks up so hard > that a manual reset is required, UFS/softupdates requires a substantial > amount of time to run fsck. If you have a very large filesystem, you > then have to w....a....i....t until fsck completes. And if you are > lucky, it will not terminate with the suggestion that you run fsck by > hand. With a true journalling filesystem this wait is obviated. The > last transactions are rerun or truncated and the system boots up. Just to bring up a point, Softupdates will also avoid the long fsck at boot. If I understand the papers I have read and with playing with Softupdates on current, Softupdates leaves files system in a consistent state so that the file-system can be mounted after a crash/lockup/etc immediately and only a background fsck need be run to free up left over pieces laying around. You guys also might want to wonder over to Kirk's Softupdates site: http://www.McKusick.com/softdep/index.html DaveD To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
