From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 12 16:27:25 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D552316A946 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 16:27:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from parrot.aev.net (parrot.aev.net [212.31.247.179]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF0843D78 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 16:27:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from soth.ventu (adsl-ull-95-215.51-151.net24.it [151.51.215.95]) (authenticated bits=128) by parrot.aev.net (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4CGUldj093886 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 18:30:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from [10.1.2.18] (alamar.ventu [10.1.2.18]) by soth.ventu (8.13.6/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4CGQsuT098230; Fri, 12 May 2006 18:26:54 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Message-ID: <4464B757.7090407@netfence.it> Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:27:03 +0200 From: Andrea Venturoli User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060423) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chuck Swiger , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <44649FA9.6080700@netfence.it> <4464A491.5050000@mac.com> <4464B160.5040605@netfence.it> <4464B42C.1040203@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <4464B42C.1040203@mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 212.31.247.179 Cc: Subject: Re: fsck way too slow X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:27:27 -0000 Chuck Swiger wrote: > OK, I agree that this doesn't sound like a hardware problem with the > drive now that you've tested it, but it was at least worth looking at. Ok, thanks for pointing it out, anyway :) >> Just to clarify: running "fsck /" (read-only) in multiuser mode takes >> less than a minute. fsck at boot takes approx. 50 times that long! > > ...and yes, that difference is not reasonable. Are you using bgfsk or > not...? Hm, what do you mean? I'd gladly let my system fsck in background after boot, but it won't do that on a root partition, as mentioned somewhere else on this thread. However, apart from that, I've set everything up according to this wish of mine (i.e. I enabled softupdates and I did not put background_fsck="NO" in my /etc/rc.conf). bye & Thanks av.