Billy Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wonders:
> Benno Senoner writes:
...
> > but actually the customer , in the worst case (in case of an fsck) must
> > turn on the power of the machine 30-60min (for a 90% full 70GB array)
> > before actual usage.
> > In my case the machines can not remain powered up all the time, because
> > the machines will be used for presentations at different locations.
>
> I'm new to raid discussion. Why would you expect a 60 minute fsck
> everytime? Would the boot up not skip that if the shutdown was clean?
> Journaling seems like a complicated solution to save the time of an
> occassional fsck. Am I missing the obvious here?
Not every time, but if the user has made some mistakes at
the system shutdown time (it has been unclean), only
journalled systems (to a certain degree) allow fast
recovery.
Say, you have a system with 600 GB filesystem, because
the application running there is somewhat stupid, as it
wants to have everything in one gigantic filesystem...
That application is used by tens of thousands of users
every day, in fact it is a commercial application sold
for several corporate clients for 24/366 operation..
The server crashes for some reason, fsck takes 22 hours!
The server crashes again a few hours after the previous
one, ... (Hopefully they have gotten a journalled fs
into that system by now..)
Take another; a popular public FTP site with storage
consisting of multiple 30-50 GB RAID5 filesystems.
Total capacity around 300 GB. It crashes for some
reason, when will it be online ? (That is a system
where a slow day is 50 GB worth of anonymous FTP
traffic.)
That FTP site happens to run journaled filesystem,
it will be back online in 5 minutes. (Or then the
problem requires hardware service which takes more
time..)
> Regards,
> Billy
> --
> Rhino Engineering
> Linux Solution Provider
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
