Yoram Arnon wrote:
+1. Files that are moved are inaccessible by normal means and there's little reason to keep two copies of them around. A sys-admin could later either remove them, or try to reassemble them and return them into place. Leaving them in their original location just makes it harder to clean them up.
Corrupted files are not left in their original location, if a -move option is specified. Fsck does not produce two copies either. As Hairong wrote, corrupted files are copied block by block to lost+found, and then removed from their original location; at the same time fsck tries to glue together consecutive blocks to minimize the number of remaining parts.
Yes, it is expensive. Perhaps we should add another option to -move, namely -recover. -move would just move corrupted files to lost+found using the namespace change, and -recover would try to recover remaining parts.
-- Best regards, Andrzej Bialecki <>< ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ __________________________________ [__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web ___|||__|| \| || | Embedded Unix, System Integration http://www.sigram.com Contact: info at sigram dot com
