Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:01:27 -0800 (PST) From: John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: comments on newfs raw disk ? Safe ? (7 terabyte array) Message-ID: <20070213104959.K95571@kozubik.com> In-Reply-To: <200702131820.l1DIKumD009658@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <200702131820.l1DIKumD009658@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > > A bit careful here ... Background fsck had some issues, > > > especially when the machine crashed or is otherwise reset > > > while the background fsck is still running. It resulted > > > in corruption that could not be repaired by fsck anymore. > > > I don't know if all of those issues have been resolved in > > > RELENG_6, but personally I always disable background fsck > > > on all of my machines, just to be safe. > > > > [...] > > UFS2 snapshots are dangerous and unstable, > > and have been since their introduction in 5.x [2]. > > That's not what I wrote. I wrote that they _had_ issues, > and that I do not know if they have been fixed. I don't > recall any reports of problems recently (i.e. in the past > few months), and there are no open PRs that seem to relate > to the current code, so those issues may very well have > been fixed. It's just my personal paranoia that lets me > disable bg fsck on my machines (and I don't really need > bg fsck anyway). Fair enough. For your information, they are still dangerous and unstable[1][2][3]. Your initial assessment is still valid today, unfortunately. FWIW, [1] is open and relates to the current code. It (bg_fsck and UFS2 snapshots) has gotten better over time - but it is still not something that I feel is fair to enable by default, as if it were rock solid, and force it onto unsuspecting end users who are not as well informed as you and I are. John Kozubik - john@kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com [1] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs/2006-January/016703.html [2] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs/2004-July/007574.html [3] [2, above] has been fixed, but large quantity inode movements keep coming back to haunt snapshots every other release or so...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070213104959.K95571>