From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat May 15 18:08:13 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B081616A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 15 May 2004 18:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ganymede.hub.org (u46n208.hfx.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.208])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0816D43D49
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 15 May 2004 18:08:13 -0700 (PDT)	(envelope-from scrappy@hub.org)
Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id B70CA35403; Sat, 15 May 2004 22:08:12 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6383353FB
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 15 May 2004 22:08:12 -0300 (ADT)
Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 22:08:12 -0300 (ADT)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040515220258.H920@ganymede.hub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: fsck in -current 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 01:08:13 -0000


I'm seriously considering putting 5.x onto my next server, to take
advantage of, if nothing else, the reduction in the GIANT LOCK reliance
... one "concern" I have is how fsck works in 5.x ...

Right now, on 4.x, I have an fsck running that has been going for ~3hrs
now:

# date; ps aux | grep fsck
Sat May 15 22:04:00 ADT 2004
root    40 99.0  4.5 185756 185796  p0  R+    6:55PM 164:01.60 fsck -y /dev/da0s1h

and is in Phase 4 ...

In 5.x, if I'm not mistaken, fsck's are backgrounded on reboot, so that
the system comes up faster ... but:

a. wouldn't that slow down the fsck itself, since all the processes on the
   machine would be using CPU/memory?

b. how long could fsck run in the background safely ... like, if I
   rebooted a machine, fsck backgrounded and then all the processes
   started up, is there a risk involved?


----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664