Re: background fsck can be dangerous!
From: Christian Laursen (xi_at_borderworlds.dk)
Date: 06/30/05
- Previous message: Matthias Buelow: "Re: background fsck can be dangerous!"
- In reply to: Matthias Buelow: "Re: background fsck can be dangerous!"
- Next in thread: Luke Crawford: "Re: background fsck can be dangerous!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Date: 30 Jun 2005 17:44:12 +0200
Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de> writes:
> Christian Laursen <xi@borderworlds.dk> writes:
>
> >Remember that if you are having trouble with softupdates and background
> >fsck reporting inconsistencies, journalling will just give you silent
> >filesystem corruption instead.
>
> What makes you believe so?
Assuming the inconsistencies are not caused by bugs in softupdates the only
thing that will cause it is hardware that does not live up to the requirements,
e.g. ata drives with write caching enabled. Journalling has the same
requirements to the hardware.
-- Christian Laursen _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Matthias Buelow: "Re: background fsck can be dangerous!"
- In reply to: Matthias Buelow: "Re: background fsck can be dangerous!"
- Next in thread: Luke Crawford: "Re: background fsck can be dangerous!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|