Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:00:37 +0400 From: Pavel Merdine <freebsd-fs@merdin.com> To: Don Lewis <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re[6]: panic again Message-ID: <153168377.20041028190037@merdin.com> In-Reply-To: <200410271648.i9RGm5DS021247@gw.catspoiler.org> References: <162265023.20041027152045@merdin.com> <200410271648.i9RGm5DS021247@gw.catspoiler.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello , Wednesday, October 27, 2004, 8:48:05 PM, you wrote: ... > This appears to be the code from FreeBSD 4.x, which does not have the > background fsck feature, so any unclean file systems must be fsck'ed > before they are mounted. This does not depend on whether or not > softupdates is enabled. Softupdates in FreeBSD 4.x is primarily just > enhances file system write performance. That should have been written in docs several years ago :) . We though we had full softupdates support and never looked at the sources to confirm that. > Background fsck also requires the file system to have a snapshot > ... > This code permits the file system to be mounted even if it is unclean as > long as softupdates is enabled. Thanks a lot for the explanation. Unfortunately, 5.x is not stable enough now for production use. And again, there is no guarantee that a panic will not occur before the check is done. Can I ask you, is there a filesystem that could be considered as substitution of FFS in FreeBSD for better reliability and performance. I mean in terms of compatibility and license. BTW, please fix a bug in dirpref(), it should use 64-bit counters. At least, make sure it does not divide by zero. You can find the details at http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2004-August/008563.html -- / Pavel Merdine
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?153168377.20041028190037>