On 06.11.12 18:09, Lindsay Sprinter wrote: > I have been using Linux now for nearly 20 years, for most of that time I > have used (and still use) ext2 or ext3. During the twenty years I have > never seen one of these "sceduled" fsck's produce any errors caused by a > failure in the drive or the file system.
+1 Running ext3: I turn my computer off at night, so 30 boots per month == one fsck per month. (I do other things while it's coming up. It makes a noise when it's ready.) The scheduled fscks haven't found anything in a decade. Even when the motherboard died, I replaced it, and resumed operations with the same drives. (Chucked the power supply - the electrolytics in them don't improve with time.) And when power in the whole street goes down, it is an _unscheduled_ fsck, triggered by detection of "unclean shutdown", which performs a more worthwhile check, anyway. And yes, it's then been necessary to fsck with a backup superblock, to get going again. But nothing's been lost so far, and lost+found is still empty, so there were not even stray inodes. Erik -- At the moment Greenland is rising in some places by three centimeters per year, but the speed is accelerating. If the whole icelayer disappears, Greenland will rise by about one kilometer. - My translation of a paragraph in http://jyllands-posten.dk/nyviden/article4775333.ece Noticed a few earthquakes in recent years? _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
