Re: fsck on a remote computer
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 04:48, Chris Zubrzycki wrote:
> > This is useful if you need the box up as much as possible, and reboots
> > only slow things down as little as possible because even if the box did
> > not reboot gracefully (power outage or something) there will be no
> > lengthy
> > fsck (of course, this also means there could be filesystem corruption,
> > but
> > you can't have it both ways).
>
> well, with xfs, I believe you can. It seems that you dont have to worry
> *too* much about non-gracefull (graceless?) reboots. The journaling
> filesystems are quite nice in that regard.
Ext3, ReiserFS, and JFS also offer the same benefits of reducing fsck.
However they still have the issue of the potential for software or hardware
bugs to cause corruption on disk which needs a fsck. Ext3 still does the
"fsck every N boots" where N is defined at mkfs time or by tune2fs for this
reason.
At Linux Kongress last year Ted Ts'O was talking about using LVM to create a
snapshot of a file system and then running fsck on the snapshot to determine
whether the file system is in a bad state. You could have a cron job do such
tests every night and then do "touch /forcefsck ; reboot".
--
If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines
of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do
whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by
posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void.
Reply to: