From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 27 18:11:49 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4D116A407; Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:11:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xi@borderworlds.dk) Received: from ferengi.borderworlds.dk (ferengi.borderworlds.dk [80.166.152.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B29F13C47E; Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:11:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xi@borderworlds.dk) Received: from dominion.borderworlds.dk (dominion.borderworlds.dk [10.1.0.10]) by ferengi.borderworlds.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38813B80C; Wed, 27 Dec 2006 19:11:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by dominion.borderworlds.dk (Postfix, from userid 2000) id 111A38C7; Wed, 27 Dec 2006 19:11:46 +0100 (CET) To: "Simon L. Nielsen" References: <20061227173240.GD1063@zaphod.nitro.dk> From: Christian Laursen Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 19:11:46 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20061227173240.GD1063@zaphod.nitro.dk> (Simon L. Nielsen's message of "Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:32:41 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: geom_mirror delayed synchronizing question X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:11:49 -0000 "Simon L. Nielsen" writes: > On 2006.12.27 15:18:43 +0100, Christian Laursen wrote: >> I am trying to add functionality to geom_mirror to prevent it from >> synchronizing mirrors until a given time even if the mirrors are >> configured for autosynchronization. The purpose of this is to be able >> to postpone the synchronization until fsck is done after an unclean >> shutdown. > > Is this mainly for forground or background fsck? For background fsck > at least, wouldn't it be simpler to just postpone fsck until the sync > is done? I think it makes sense for both foreground and background fsck but I agree that for background fsck it would work to just postpone the fsck. However, we use foreground fsck everywhere so that is my primary concern. -- Christian Laursen