Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:47:38 -0600 From: Eric Anderson <anderson@freebsd.org> To: John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: comments on newfs raw disk ? Safe ? (7 terabyte array) Message-ID: <45D215DA.2000306@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20070213104959.K95571@kozubik.com> References: <200702131820.l1DIKumD009658@lurza.secnetix.de> <20070213104959.K95571@kozubik.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/13/07 13:01, John Kozubik wrote: > > 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. Uhh, aren't those threads below at *least* a year old, or am I misreading it? If so - then I think you in fact need to become more informed, since massive UFS updates have been done in the past 6 months. If you have pointers to more recent issues, please post them.. Eric > [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... > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45D215DA.2000306>