From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun May 16 16:18:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from bubba.whistle.com (s205m7.whistle.com [207.76.205.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A3515030 for ; Sun, 16 May 1999 16:18:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from archie@whistle.com) Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) id QAA75741; Sun, 16 May 1999 16:17:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Archie Cobbs Message-Id: <199905162317.QAA75741@bubba.whistle.com> Subject: Re: fsck and large file system In-Reply-To: <373ECCB9.34648FFA@funk.org> from Alex Le Heux at "May 16, 99 01:48:41 pm" To: alexlh@funk.org (Alex Le Heux) Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 16:17:36 -0700 (PDT) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Alex Le Heux writes: > Maybe I'm completely wrong here, but didn't I read somewhere that with > softupdates it would theoretically be possible to boot the system before > the fsck and fsck while it's running? Yes.. if you make the assumptions that: 1. There are no bugs in the soft updates code 2. Your disk always writes its blocks atomically Then it follows that the only disk inconsistencies that are possible during any boot-up are minor ones (eg, bitmap entry showing an allocated block that's not pointed to by anything) that can be fixed by a background daemon running at its leisure. As a consequence of doing this, your may have free, but temporarily unavailable, disk blocks for a while until the daemon finishes. Julian et.al. can correct me if I've left something out.. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message