Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 10:09:43 -0500 From: devin-freebsdquestions@rintrah.org To: James McNaughton <jtm63@enteract.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Softupdates & fsck Message-ID: <20020103100943.A54345@tharmas.rintrah.org> In-Reply-To: <86adw1lvw8.fsf@jamestown.21stcentury.net>; from jtm63@enteract.com on Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 12:32:39PM -0600 References: <019301c1820a$1b07e2b0$0200a8c0@mark2> <20011211070617.A51634@tharmas.rintrah.org> <86adw1lvw8.fsf@jamestown.21stcentury.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 12:32:39PM -0600, James McNaughton wrote: > devin-freebsdquestions@rintrah.org writes: > > <snip> > > > > > > > ad0s1a: hard error reading fsbn 656735 of 328304-328415 (ad0s1 bn 656735; > > > cn 40 tn 224 sn 23) status=59 error=40 > > > > > > > > > > > > CANNOT READ: BLK 328304 > > > > > > CONTINUE? [yn] y > > > > This was on / without softupdates. The worst of your errors. > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > ** /dev/ad0s1h > > > > [snip] > > > > > UNREF FILE I=3166465 OWNER=nobody MODE=100644 > > > > > > SIZE=1295 MTIME=Dec 6 12:20 2001 > > > > > > RECONNECT? [yn] y > > > > lots of unreferenced files. You'll see that on the softupdates mounted partitions, > > fsck is only reclaiming unused space by clearing up these unreferenced files. > > > > [snip] > > > ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups > > > > > > FREE BLK COUNT(S) WRONG IN SUPERBLK > > > > > > SALVAGE? [yn] y > > > > > > > > > > > > SUMMARY INFORMATION BAD > > > > > > SALVAGE? [yn] y > > > > And here you have it. The summary info was bad. It's cleaning up the free blocks > > incorrectly marked used. > > > > [snip] > > > > The rest of your file systems looked pretty much the same to me. Didn't look like they > > were a "mess." Just reclaiming unused blocks as is supposed to happen with > > softupdates. As others have noted, you can do this in the background in -CURRENT. > > > > --devin > > Do I understand this correctly, that -- except for the file system > without softupdates -- fsck could have been skipped and the file > system mounted with no serious consequences? E.g. that a huge file > system could be immediately reused with only some blocks incorrectly > allocated and then fsck'ed at a later, more convenient time? > Yes. That is my understanding. --devin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020103100943.A54345>