From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 7 09:34:15 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 917E3106567F for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:34:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f171.google.com (mail-ew0-f171.google.com [209.85.219.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA3CC8FC12 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:34:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@googlemail.com) Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so2196889ewy.43 for ; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:34:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=PSx4sA6GA3GncmCzu/Ek5CrIUJ33qKCg1icg+F9OkZo=; b=Ca4GRhH2lHpf/5L9glFXyrEHaqX184GrKpS08EnevP7TVb+c8avBn27AwBMwnPpbjC C4N229GrEwM+bwr9hQlNhEodoD6lwysHcuD/b91KEzs/Hzo95YMrzL2oSrNrePRjF+QV 4bpLnWHPtrx6gKClhNdKcL/QYejpyDJCGeGk4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=O5rwwQoV9h4I40fpKmmA1kxN3OC1hR+o3PVBW932QWPxSqV5utW+7/uP77cMKu2qkJ pJY7QolYq9eed37QepQopkby3gOH3Q0j7ABBDARzVWHlfZMPypmyl8rv/0xEPs70DG+h XwO+6JUDkF7rjzbGZV+GX9/Cvvgec2/H2zx90= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.210.127.13 with SMTP id z13mr1964948ebc.57.1239096854050; Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:34:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <47952575-35FD-4733-9262-A6DAA3ACB762@lafn.org> References: <200903311657.n2VGvLE8010101@lurza.secnetix.de> <20090406001614.304360d6@gluon.draftnet> <47952575-35FD-4733-9262-A6DAA3ACB762@lafn.org> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 10:34:13 +0100 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: Doug Hardie , FreeBSD Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Subject: Re: Question about forcing fsck at boottime X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: utisoft@gmail.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:34:16 -0000 > > On Apr 6, 2009, at 11:12, Chris Rees wrote: > >> Can >> no-one can come up with a reply either quoting a mailing list or >> giving the circumstances when: >> >> a) Background fsck caused data CORRUPTION >> >> _and_ >> >> b) A foreground fsck would not have done the same >> >> ? 2009/4/6 Doug Hardie : > Yes. =A0When background FSCK first became standard I let it go that way o= n my > production servers. =A0The first time we had a power issue that resulted = in a > shutdown of a server it tried to come back up when the power was restored= . > =A0I have a large number of daemons that rely on configure files and othe= r > information that is reasonably frequently updated. =A0Some of those files= were > in the process of being updated when it shut down. =A0As a result backgro= und > FSCK did not get around to those files till much after the daemons were u= p > and running (or trying to run). =A0Most of them worked ok at the beginnin= g. > =A0However after FSCK resolved the problems, the underlying files changed= . > =A0The daemons couldn't function at that point. > > While a simple reboot at that point fixed everything, that caused yet > another outage for users. So, the answer is NO, it does NOT cause data CORRUPTION. A simple reboot solved it? Really, you're advocating guaranteed extended downtime every time there's a power outage, compared with a slight chance of a slightly longer downtime while every other time it comes almost straight up. Any more replies, please, read the damned question. > I doubt that the concept of background FSCK is broken and I suspect that = the implementation is good too. _Thank_ you Chris --=20 A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?