Re: newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks
From: Dan Nelson (dnelson_at_allantgroup.com)
Date: 11/05/03
- Previous message: Wes Peters: "newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- In reply to: Wes Peters: "newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- Next in thread: Peter Jeremy: "Re: newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- Reply: Peter Jeremy: "Re: newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 19:57:10 -0600 To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>
In the last episode (Nov 04), Wes Peters said:
> I emailed Kirk about this state of affairs and he confirmed that
> newfs was developed with operator intervention in mind. He suggested
> employing one of the unused flags in the filesystem header as a
> 'consistent' flag, setting it to 'not consistent' at the beginning of
> newfs, and then updating to 'is consistent' at the end. The
> performance hit in updating all superblock copies at the end is small
> but noticable (< 1s on a rather slow 6GB filesystem).
Would writing a block of zeros to the first (or first n) superblock,
newfs'ing, then rewriting the correct data do the same thing without
affecting the filesystem itself? I'm thinking about 4.x and cross-OS
portability here.
-- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com _______________________________________________ freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Wes Peters: "newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- In reply to: Wes Peters: "newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- Next in thread: Peter Jeremy: "Re: newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- Reply: Peter Jeremy: "Re: newfs and mount vs. half-baked disks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
