Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:11:57 -0800 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: "Andrew P. Lentvorski" <bsder@allcaps.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, "Brandon D. Valentine" <bandix@looksharp.net>, penglish@hydro.washington.edu, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Two RAID questions Message-ID: <20020118151156.A4612@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> In-Reply-To: <20020118140049.A87081-100000@mail.allcaps.org>; from bsder@allcaps.org on Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:07:52PM -0800 References: <Pine.HPX.4.21.0201181324590.12302-100000@meter.hydro.washington.edu> <20020118140049.A87081-100000@mail.allcaps.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:07:52PM -0800, Andrew P. Lentvorski wrote: > I looked at the CVS repository today and didn't note a tag on the fsck > code for -STABLE. > > Is background fsck'ing included in -STABLE? The large fsck times for > multi-GB and TB RAID servers is becoming an impediment to using FreeBSD as > a server (where BSD has traditionally been strong). > > If it's not included, what are the issues preventing it from getting > folded backward? It isn't included because it's not stable yet. It's improving, but in my experience it still causes problems. I rather doubt it will be MFC'd. File system stability is about as important as it gets so significantly more shake out is critical before inflicting background fsck on users. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8SKu8XY6L6fI4GtQRAvK2AKDicNkpnnHWlrqctVh39INyytjBEACdE+Xm D9d4hCQLH/M0YLFT4VdGebk= =A5mV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020118151156.A4612>