>> Also, depending on the usage patterns, you might have a fs where high >> numbered inodes are used, while the fs itself is pretty empty. Filling >> up a fs with lots of files and them removing a lot of them is an >> example that could lead to such a situation. This diff does not speed >> things up in such cases. > > ...might have an impact in my case, since I often do things like rebuilding > the system including tons of packages on this machine, and that use case of > course perfectly matches what you say above. I think I'll remake these file > systems and run the test again just to satisfy my curiosity. But that'll > have to wait until after dinner. :-) > > Anyway, I see improvements both in memory usage and in speed, and I see no > obvoius malfunctions, so I'd say it's a go.
Hi Otto, Comparing your diff with FreeBSD svn (not cvs, they dropped cvs! my bad on the initial comment) after Benny pointed this out. http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/head/sbin/fsck_ffs/pass1.c?revision=201708&view=markup Look at this comment inside the file /* * This optimization speeds up future runs of fsck * by trimming down the number of inodes in cylinder * groups that formerly had many inodes but now have * fewer in use. */ and the commit entry by McKusick for rev 188110 "Update the actions previously attempted by the -D option to make them robust. With these changes fsck is now able to detect and reliably rebuild corrupted cylinder group maps. The -D option is no longer necessary as it has been replaced by a prompt asking whether the corrupted cylinder group should be rebuilt and doing so when requested. These actions are only offered and taken when running fsck in manual mode. Corrupted cylinder groups found during preen mode cause the fsck to fail. Add the -r option to free up excess unused inodes. Decreasing the number of preallocated inodes reduces the running time of future runs of fsck and frees up space that can allocated to files. The -r option is ignored when running in preen mode." ------------------------------------------------------ Will you please please please integrate that part of the code too!!! This is absolutely useful to have and is a fairly common situation. It will make fsck better and be a good way to partially defrag your fs. Or did you plan to keep that for later after more testing on this diff? Thanks, amit
