From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct 31 15:08:51 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A78265DC;
 Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:08:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (unknown
 [IPv6:2602:d1:b4d6:e600:4261:86ff:fef6:aa2a])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6360FD8B;
 Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:08:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s9VFAMKl010253;
 Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:10:22 -0700 (PDT)
 (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com)
To: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=ahsmVPAmidB33NTtKmxv0QDvp+U4Mua3=z1bjQ4dC0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6978A7BF-3CB7-4088-904D-5A60D755A04C@gmail.com>
 <20141025113846.GY1235@albert.catwhisker.org>
 <CAN6yY1tp+ox6jHVnFJ4m3AYf4bBY-OzEfTnwrBHZZ0wwEARAxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <6bb4cda435fb420fb663fa1d47b85a08@ultimatedns.net>
 <CAN6yY1sOothUj1i5tTKPHDYNZ+CQ3ZKxmYrmq_GE4Ft66LPcBw@mail.gmail.com>,
 <CAJ-Vmo=ahsmVPAmidB33NTtKmxv0QDvp+U4Mua3=z1bjQ4dC0w@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Chris H" <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com>
Subject: Re: Dump time issues
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:10:22 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=fixed
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-id: <9c5f3b0230bf63d32ee8a83e81b1f167@ultimatedns.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:08:51 -0000

On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:20:01 -0700 Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote

> On 27 October 2014 11:09, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >> I'm aware of two issues with SU+J, one of which is annoying and the other
> > is worse.
> > 1. If the journal is not fully written on power fail or some other reason,
> > you may need to do a full fsck of the volume and the behavior of the system
> > until this is done can be very unpredictable.
> > 2. You can't safely snapshot the system. This is what 'dump -L' does. This
> > means that some files dumped from a live FS may not be consistent (not
> > good!) or, if '-L' is used, the system may well hang.
> >
> > While I love the fast fsck times (2 or 3 seconds) after a crash, I also
> > question the default. Still, it may be a preferred choice be used for very
> > large file systems where a full fsck would take a very long time as long as
> > the risks are understood. For these systems, ZFS might be a better choice.
> > These arguments do NOT favor it being the default, IMHO.
> 
> If people can reproduce SU+J problems then please file bugs. There
> have been some fixes with the journal handling over the last year or
> so and I haven't had this problem on -HEAD any longer, but it doesn't
> mean it's there.
Problem existed on RELENG_9 as of 1 mos, and 1 wk. ago. I don't
have any useful output to provide (I simply blew away the system
&& re-installed w/o SU+J).

--Chris
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -adrian