On 3/29/26 00:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra <[email protected]> writes:
>> On 3/28/26 23:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It's apparently been there and been default since FreeBSD 13.1.
>>> This leads one to wonder how come BF member dikkop is managing
>>> to run this test successfully.  I speculate that it's using a
>>> filesystem type that doesn't do sparse files (cc'ing Vondra
>>> for confirmation on that).
> 
>> It's running on ufs. But I think the explanation is very simple. We had
>> a short power outage on Thursday, and the FreeBSD machine failed to boot
>> properly after the power was restored. IIUC this test is new, right?
> 
> Not that new, it dates to b15c15139, about a week ago.
> 
> I've reproduced Thomas' failure on a local FreeBSD 15.0 image
> using zfs, and confirmed that this cowboy hack fixes it:
> 

Interesting. Then I guess it has to be due to some difference in ufs vs.
zfs, when handling sparse files. It might be useful to add a bit more
variation here, and switch some of the animals to non-default
filesystems (not just the FreeBSD ones, which we seem to have only two
that run reasonably often). I'd bet most of the linux systems run on
ext4/xfs, few on btrfs/zfs.

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra



Reply via email to