From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 14 18:40:52 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 200BE773 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:40:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c40:0:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D17032DDC for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:40:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC22AE6DDC; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:40:49 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cran.org.uk; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mail; bh=C0VII10YALZT hLBctREDlp4y0Z0=; b=R2eVED7cYKaGQnos9XSNwv8szEpgA52SBcfbjQOHqib9 YiBKXFczuXJ2HRCjzEUxQePBBZjN5CpL6z/3Q8e/a3EsLjcaoiOqUboRxzb4CCTE K+Yvl7BHxuySA9vxg1PV2i8nDqquNmanc7oXG1qjAv19qWRQb3sO6bbzHj3XnDw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cran.org.uk; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mail; b=QDo/cp vuWJPsJ0P3Wr1W0znU+v5gYM/+7NgFrLPyRiULL/6Dk1lMW/O3XhPAhcPlDdJwFY pfIQa9nhBMNMnFCknnKKk0NGtsdm1/FYmYmx7L3SD8j39VbExCwZFWjkLgDBZVDD dt+Md4PXNqqS+Uz2sNCKBChDnFdLNJ0Og12Hs= Received: from [192.168.2.103] (unknown [93.89.81.205]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76FF1E6DD6; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:40:49 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <525C3AB0.6030609@cran.org.uk> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:40:48 +0100 From: Bruce Cran User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: CeDeROM Subject: Re: SU+J Lost files after a power failure References: <525A6831.5070402@gmail.com> <20131014133953.58f74659@gumby.homeunix.com> <525C1D1C.9050708@gmail.com> <525C2554.7080203@pchotshots.com> <525C2FBC.4080808@cran.org.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Demelier , Adam Vande More , Brad Mettee , FreeBSD Questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:40:52 -0000 On 10/14/2013 7:33 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > Thank you for explaining :-) So it looks that it would be sensible to > force filesystem check every n-th mount..? Or to do a filesystem check > after crash..? Are there any flags like that to mark filesystem > unclean and to force fsck after n-th mount? That would assume > disabling journal and soft updates journaling I guess..? > > What would be the best option for best data integrity in case of > crash? That would be helpful for development systems I guess :-) As I understand it UFS+J gives the same reliability as UFS with a normal fsck after a crash, so on a development system the only ways to improve the situation would be to mount with the 'sync' option, disable write caching on the disk or to switch to a different filesystem like ZFS. -- Bruce Cran